Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Feature
  • Published:

Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2018

Nature Biotechnology volume 36, pages 1136–1145 (2018)Cite this article

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) continue to reign supreme, although cellular and gene therapies are slowly starting to gather momentum. Burgeoning growth in biosimilars may threaten future brand monopolies for mAbs and other biologics.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Product approvals profile.
Figure 2: Overview of mAb approvals.
Figure 3: Relative use of mammalian- versus nonmammalian-based production cell lines in the manufacture of biopharmaceuticals approved over the indicated periods.

References

  1. Walsh, G. Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2014. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 992–1000 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Walsh, G. Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2010. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 917–924 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Walsh, G. Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2006. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 769–776 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. La Merie Business Intelligence. http://www.lamerie.com (2018).

  5. Biosimilars in the EU report: information guide for health professionals. https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/leaflet/biosimilars-eu-information-guide-healthcare-professionals_en.pdf (2017).

  6. The impact of biosimilar competition on price, volume and market share, June 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/growth/content/impact-biosimilar-competition-price-volume-and-market-share-updated-version-2016-0_en (2016).

  7. Bertolini, L.R. et al. The transgenic animal platform for biopharmaceutical production. Transgenic Res. 25, 329–343 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Park, T.S. et al. Deposition of bioactive human epidermal growth factor in the egg white of transgenic hens using an oviduct-specific minisynthetic promoter. FASEB J. 29, 2386–2396 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Miliotou, A.N. & Papadopoulou, L.C. CAR T-cell therapy: a new era in cancer immunotherapy. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 19, 5–18 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. June, C.H., O'Connor, R.S., Kawalekar, O.U., Ghassemi, S. & Milone, M.C. CAR T cell immunotherapy for human cancer. Science 359, 1361–1365 (2018).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kaplon, H. & Reichert, J.M. Antibodies to watch in 2018. MAbs 10, 183–203 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. FirstWord. Charting the Global Biosimilar Pipeline (FirstWord Publishing, 2018).

  13. Ginn, S.L., Amaya, A.K., Alexander, I.E., Edelstein, M. & Abedi, M.R. Gene therapy clinical trials worldwide to 2017: an update. J. Gene Med. 20, e3015 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zheng, P.P., Kros, J.M. & Li, J. Approved CAR-T cell therapies: ice bucket challenges on glaring safety risks and long-term impacts. Drug Discov. Today 23 1175–1182 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Labanieh, L., Majzner, R.G. & Mackall, C.L. Programming CAR-T cells to kill cancer. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2, 377–391 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Köhl, U., Arsenieva, S., Holzinger, A. & Abken, H. CAR T cells in trials: recent achievements and challenges that remain in the production of modified T cells for clinical applications. Hum. Gene Ther. 29, 559–568 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Klinger, M., Benjamin, J., Kischel, R., Stienen, S. & Zugmaier, G. Harnessing T cells to fight cancer with BiTE® antibody constructs—past developments and future directions. Immunol. Rev. 270, 193–208 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Trivedi, A. et al. Clinical pharmacology and translational aspects of bispecific antibodies. Clin. Transl. Sci. 10, 147–162 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical Sciences and Bernal Institute, Gary Walsh is in the Industrial Biochemistry Program, University of Limerick, Ireland.,

    Gary Walsh

Authors
  1. Gary Walsh
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary Walsh.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Table 1

Traditional biotech product approvals 2014–July 2018. (PDF 165 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Walsh, G. Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2018. Nat Biotechnol 36, 1136–1145 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4305

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4305

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing