The report is available in English with a French summary - KCE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

32 Plasma KCE Reports 120 NAT technology for viral DNA detection has dramatically reduced this window period. Negative results from the subsequent application of NAT technology to the plasma pool for a range of viruses (HCV, HIV, Parvo B19, HBV, etc.) provide assurance that the initial viral load in the plasma pool is zero or very low. 2.2.2 The worldwide supply of plasma products 2.2.2.1 Corporate structure of the market of plasma products Restructuring of the sector of plasma products Considering the increasing and vital needs of plasma products in most western countries, and simultaneously the uncertain level of donation, purchasers of plasma products – ie hospitals, and more generally health care institutions – can feel in an inferior position towards the plasma fractionation industry. The evolution of medical practices and also the political pressure of patient associations on health authorities do not leave them much room for manoeuvre. Therefore it is important to analyze the recent evolution of this industry to have a clear idea on the purchasers’ actual negotiation power. MAIN SPECIFICITIES OF THIS INDUSTRY SINCE THE NINETIES: FUSIONS AND MARKET CONSOLIDATION In 1996, the number of global stakeholders in the nineties was relatively high: almost 40 companies (or non profit organisations) were identified worldwide in the plasma fractionation industry. Following several merger waves, only 20 companies still exist today. Among these 20 companies some of them do not play a noticeable role on the global market because of their size or because of regulatory barriers that still isolate their domestic market from the international market. Hence, only a very small number of companies can be considered as real “global players” in terms of economic weight: and market share. CURRENT SITUATION (2003-2005) Worldwide, only five private companies still play an important role (>5%) on the global market. Non profit organizations are also important stakeholders; however some of them enjoy a monopoly, based on a specific national regulation. Table 10: Global firms on the plasma product industry 2003 2005 Baxter 18.4% 19.5% State ruled or on Profit 23.1% 16.5% Organisations CSL-Behring 15.8% 17.1% Talecris / Bayer 14.2% 13.8% Octapharma 5.7% 7.1% Grifols 7.6% 6.1% CSL/ZLB / Bioplasma 6% 1.6% Other 9.1% 18.2% Total 100% 100%
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 33 GEOGRAPHICAL DIMENSION OF THIS INDUSTRY: Table 11: Geographical dimension of the plasma product industry ‘MM US$ Oceania Africa South Middle Asia- Europe North World America East Pacific America Total Baxter 13.22 8.77 174.12 26.31 74.81 557.20 1230 2084.4 CSL-Behring 116.54 13.08 72.4 39.2 191.54 539.98 929.74 1902.47 Talecris 0 5.12 19.3 15.37 55.58 128.65 925.79 1149.81 Octapharma 24.5 32.25 98.78 96.75 23.07 382.98 205.75 864.08 Grifols 0 1.53 40.59 4.60 16.66 413.59 270.65 747.63 Leaving aside non profit or public organisations (the strategy of which is largely connected with specific national regulations), private companies’ strategies is obviously guided by financial prospects and expected profits on each geographical area. In that respect, the North-American area remains the most attractive geographical area for plasma fractionation firms. Therefore, European buyers are apt to compete with American ones, and a harsh competition could arise at any time between them with two possible consequences: punctual supply shortage and/or sharp increase in the prices of plasma-derived products. Capital structure: Four profiles identified As far as capital structure is concerned, one must notice that four profiles of capital structure have emerged, generally due to specific and deliberate corporate strategies. In other cases, (public institutions or other structures commissioned by public authorities) capital structure is closely connected with the monopoly status of the institution or specific national regulations. PROFILE 1: PRIVATE OWNED FIRMS (OCTAPHARMA AND GRIFOLS) These two firms are relatively close situations from this point of view: Octapharma is as a private-owned firm, and so is Grifols. In both cases, other stakeholders (especially banks) can play an important role in capital structure. However, private and family stakeholders remain the key investors in both cases and key stakeholders often remain deeply connected with the national or even regional economy (Switzerland / Catalonia). PROFILE 2: NATIONAL STATE-CONTROLLED FIRMS OR INSTITUTIONS (LFB) In several western countries, fractionation firms enjoy a monopoly as defined by a specific regulation (generally for historical or cultural reasons). In this case, the firm is either owned or controlled by public stakeholders, ie governmental institutions or institutions commissioned by the government. LFB in France is a traditional example: it enjoys a monopoly in plasma fractionation based on a French specific regulation. Before 2005, LFB used to be a public-law institution. Since then, it has been transformed into a private law holding company (legally a Ltd company) divided into two subsidiary companies: one focusing on Biotechnology, one focusing on Plasma fractionation. The capital of both subsidiary companies is state-controlled. Key members of the Board of Administration are government’s representatives (Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Health). PROFILE 3: FOREIGN-OWNED FIRMS (CSL-BEHRING) CSL-Behring is a very specific case: it was originally a German firm, CSL Behring became a subsidiary of CSL Limited, a biopharmaceutical company headquartered in Melbourne, Australia. From a financial point of view, about 90% of the shares are now controlled by Australian stakeholders. Therefore, even if CSL-Behring’s main facilities and RD centres are still located in Europe, it is under the control of foreign-based institutions.
Page 1 and 2: Comment assurer l’autosuffisance
Page 3 and 4: Comment assurer l’autosuffisance
Page 5 and 6: KCE Reports 120B Plasma i PRÉFACE
Page 7 and 8: KCE Reports 120B Plasma iii MÉTHOD
Page 9 and 10: KCE Reports 120B Plasma v En ce qui
Page 11 and 12: KCE Reports 120B Plasma vii RECOMMA
Page 13 and 14: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 1 Scientific
Page 15 and 16: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 3 GLOSSARY A
Page 17 and 18: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 5 1 INTRODUC
Page 19 and 20: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 7 Focus: sta
Page 21 and 22: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 9 Two techni
Page 23 and 24: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 11 Therefore
Page 25 and 26: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 13 FRENCH-SP
Page 27 and 28: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 15 Number of
Page 29 and 30: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 17 Table 4:
Page 35 and 36: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 23 Role of t
Page 37 and 38: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 25 2.1.3.2 P
Page 39 and 40: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 27 • 73% o
Page 41 and 42: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 29 2.2 TRANS
Page 43: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 31 Figure 6:
Page 47 and 48: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 35 It is sur
Page 49 and 50: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 37 Plasma fr
Page 51 and 52: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 39 2.3 LIMIT
Page 55 and 56: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 43 3.2 INDIC
Page 57 and 58: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 45 Subcutane
Page 61 and 62: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 49 3.2.2 Evi
Page 63 and 64: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 51 Search re
Page 65 and 66: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 53 CIDP IG i
Page 67 and 68: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 55 • IG re
Page 69 and 70: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 57 Solid org
Page 71 and 72: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 59 A Cochran
Page 73 and 74: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 61 • In ch
Page 75 and 76: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 63 Two small
Page 77 and 78: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 65 was lower
Page 79 and 80: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 67 Three RCT
Page 81 and 82: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 69 Severe se
Page 83 and 84: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 71 The analy
Page 85 and 86: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 73 3.3.1.2 T
Page 87 and 88: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 75 Figure 7:
Page 89 and 90: KCE Reports 120 Plasma 77 Figure 10
Page 95 and 96:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 83 • For b
Page 97 and 98:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 85 3.3.2.6 L
Page 99 and 100:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 87 • The p
Page 101 and 102:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 89 In Belgiu
Page 103 and 104:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 91 Multifoca
Page 105 and 106:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 93 Based on
Page 107 and 108:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 95 Disease /
Page 109 and 110:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 97 3.3.4 Exp
Page 111 and 112:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 99 Figure 12
Page 113 and 114:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 101 Key poin
Page 115 and 116:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 103 Key poin
Page 117 and 118:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 105 • Conf
Page 119 and 120:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 107 As far a
Page 121 and 122:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 109 Followin
Page 123 and 124:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 111 4.3 HOW
Page 125 and 126:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 113 Improvin
Page 127 and 128:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 115 4.3.2 St
Page 129 and 130:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 117 4.4 CONC
Page 131 and 132:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 119 FAVOURIN
Page 133 and 134:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 121 APPENDIX
Page 135 and 136:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 123 For othe
Page 137 and 138:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 125 Table 48
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 131 Distribu
Page 145 and 146:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 133 • Conv
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 137 6 REFERE
Page 151 and 152:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 139 41. Pruz
Page 153 and 154:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 141 82. Comi
Page 155 and 156:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 143 123. Cre
Page 157 and 158:
KCE Reports 120 Plasma 145 165. Cua
Page 159 and 160:
This page is left intentionally bla
Page 161 and 162:
KCE reports 1. Efficacité et renta
Page 163 and 164:
73. Financement du programme de soi
show all

The report is available in English with a French summary - KCE

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?