Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFerris, Matthew J
dc.contributor.authorSun, Kai
dc.contributor.authorSavard, Corey
dc.contributor.authorSuresh, Tejas
dc.contributor.authorMishra, Mark V
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-28T12:32:55Z
dc.date.available2021-10-28T12:32:55Z
dc.date.issued2021-09-23
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10713/16966
dc.description.abstractBackground: Developing novel pharmaceuticals demands substantial investment despite high uncertainty of success and ultimate market value. While many established drug companies are highly profitable and have large portfolios of diversified assets, much of new drug innovation, a very high-risk, high-reward gambit, stems from smaller companies striving to bring their first products to market. While drug costs, and thus pharmaceutical company profits, can be controversial, it is unquestionable that the products from these companies provide great benefit to humanity. Hence, the ongoing success of the industry as a whole is quite relevant from a public health perspective. Methodology: We sought to investigate factors influencing pharmaceutical company success using company stock performance on major US indices as a surrogate. As the profitability of large-capitalization (cap) pharmaceutical companies is well established, we focused on small- and mid-cap companies in this analysis. Small- and mid-cap pharmaceutical companies (both currently active and now defunct) and historical share prices were captured, including company details and the nature of drug pipelines. Funding by US academia was acquired via CMS.gov Open Payments and categorized into contributions < or ≥$100,000. Stock performance was considered good (+ ≥25%), mediocre (±25%), or poor (- ≥25%). Univariate and multivariate associations were assessed. Results: Of the 420 companies included in the analysis, 101 (24%) had good, 76 (18%) mediocre, and 243 (58%) poor performance. The following were associated with performance in univariate analysis: initial public offering (IPO) price (P < 0.001), time from IPO (P < 0.001), number of drug programs (P = 0.019), and academic funding (P = 0.00013), with trend for diverse pipelines (both oncology and nononcology programs under development) (P = 0.069). On multivariate analysis, IPO price was inversely associated (P < 0.0001), while academic funding (P < 0.0001) and more drug programs (P = 0.0025) were positively associated with performance. Analysis of pharmaceutical IPOs since 2000 suggests a 20% rate of outright company failure. Conclusions: The majority of included companies had lackluster stock performance, suggestive of low potential for drug development success and high probability of financial disaster. Robust drug pipelines and academic collaboration seem to be strongly related to company success.en_US
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.18210en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherCureus, Inc.en_US
dc.relation.ispartofCureusen_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2021, Ferris et al.en_US
dc.subjectbiotechen_US
dc.subjectdrug developmenten_US
dc.subjectdrug pricingen_US
dc.subjectdrugsen_US
dc.subjectpharmaceuticalsen_US
dc.subjectstocksen_US
dc.subjecttherapeuticsen_US
dc.titleFactors Related to Small- and Mid-Capitalization Pharmaceutical Company Success Using Stock Performance as a Surrogateen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.7759/cureus.18210
dc.identifier.pmid34692353
dc.source.volume13
dc.source.issue9
dc.source.beginpagee18210
dc.source.endpage
dc.source.countryUnited States


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record