Bio Job Blog : Bio Jobs : Biotechnology Jobs : Biopharmaceutical Jobs : Bioscience, Biotech Jobs : Bio Job Blog : Biocareer : Bio-Business Training, Biotechnology Training : Jobs in Biology : Internships in Biology : Internships in Biotechnology

After announcing its quarterly earnings and a 24 percent increase in 2011 profits, AstraZeneca (AZ) today made public its decision to eliminate another 7,300 jobs. Earlier this week there was speculation that job cuts were likely but the exact numbers were not disclosed. 

The reasons given for the layoffs despite increased annual profits? Government spending cuts for healthcare and stiff generic competition for several of its blockbuster drugs including Seroquel XR (depression), Atacand (hypertension) Crestor (cholesterol-lowering) and Symbicort (asthma); all of which have lost or will be losing patent protection in the near future. According to a company press release generic competition cut revenues by $2.0 billion in 2011 whereas government price interventions cost the company another $1.0 billion. The announced job cuts are expected to save AZ $1.6 billion by 2014—great news for shareholders but not so much for the employees who are losing their jobs!

Most of the cuts will take place in R&D. To that end, the company will close its facility in Montreal and layoff staff at its Soedertaelje site in Sweden. Interestingly, the company plans on focusing more on neuroscience and intends to hire 40 to 50 scientists in its new Innovative Medicine unit which is partly based in Boston, MA and Cambridge in England.

While layoffs at AZ were expected, the size of the current layoff does not bode well for other pharmaceutical employees. It is becoming increasingly clear that big pharma companies are getting out of R&D and focusing their efforts on M&A and licensing deals to fill their thinning pipelines. Also, while shedding R&D and sales jobs in developed markets, big pharma companies are investing heavily in building facilities and hiring thousands of R&D and sales personnel in emerging markets. From my perspective, it appears that big pharma has consciously decided to abandon developed Western markets where sales growth is in the single digits in favor of emerging ones where double digit growth is expected for the next decade.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Thing have been quiet in the pharma layoff space during 2012. I guess that is not so surprising since we are only one month into 2012. However, there was a post on yesterday’s Pharmalot blog which indicates pharma layoffs may resume in earnest over the next few weeks. 

According to the post, AstraZeneca (AZ) is poised to shed thousands of more jobs after the company announces it earnings later this week. As you may recall, AZ recently announced that it would lay off 400 employees at its US headquarters and eliminate another 1,150 jobs from its US sales force. Like other pharmaceutical companies, things have been tough for AZ as three of its blockbuster products Crestor (cholesterol lowering), Nexium (acid reflux) and Seroquel (antipsychotic) lose patent protection and face stiff generic competition.

The Pharmalot post also reported that:

“Between 2007 and 2009, AstraZeneca eliminated 12,600 positions, a move that saved $1.6 billion annually, although that figure rose to $2.4 billion by 2010. The cuts announced that year were designed to save $1.9 billion annually by 2014 It is not clear how much the drug maker hopes to save with still more cuts, but some $3 billion may be spent on a stock buyback to bolster shareholder confidence.”

It is important to note that the massive downsizing that has taken place in the pharma industry over the past decade has little to do with the recession and everything to do with the loss of blockbuster revenues due to generic encroachment. Put simply, most pharma companies grew too large too quickly and subsequently realized that could not sustain their vast infrastructures if the loss of blockbuster sales revenues could not be replaced by new products. To wit, if you look at the P&L statements of many pharmaceutical companies, most have $5 billon to $30 billion of readily-available cash reserves on hand to “play” with. Sadly, the downsizing that has taken place had little to do with the present and everything to do about the future profitability of big pharma companies.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

British pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca today announced that it would invest $200 million into a new manufacturing facility located in China Medical City in Jiangsu province in Eastern China. This is the company’s largest global investment ever in a single manufacturing facility. The new plant which will be completed by 2013 will manufacture intravenous and oral solid drugs. 

AstraZeneca was one of the first Western pharmaceutical companies to establish a presence in China (1993) and has fast become one of the leading biopharmaceutical companies in the country doing about $1.0 billion in business annually. 

Many of Astra Zeneca’s competitors including Novartis, Roche, Merck & Co. and others have also recently made large investments into Chinese R&D and manufacturing facilities. If this doesn’t eliminate anyone’s doubt that pharma is shifting its focus from the West to emerging markets, I am not sure what will!!! While this shift may be bad news for American life scientist seeking employment, it is certainly welcome news for Chinese Nationals who received their life sciences training in the US and other Western nations.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (there are openings in China!!!!!!)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Astra Zeneca today announced that it will eliminate 400 positions at the company’s Wilmington, DE headquarters. Most of the cuts will be in sales and marketing and the downsizing is intended “streamline portions of its commercial business to best serve patients in the US.”

According to a press release, about 70 of the estimated 400 job cuts will come from existing unfilled vacancies. Also, employees will have the option to choose to potentially leave the company with a possible package. All decisions will be finalized by early December.

Like many of its competitors, AstraZeneca is facing fierce competition from generic manufacturers and downward pricing pressures. The company currently employs 61,000 persons worldwide including 14,000 in North America.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Unlike many of its big pharma competitors which are shuttering US manufacturing facilities, MedImmune, the biologics division of London-based pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca, Friday, opened a second bioproduction site in Frederick, MD.

The site which will employ 250 or more workers was constructed to manufacture MedImmune’s products including Synagis, a monoclonal antibody-based treatment against respiratory syncytial virus infections in high risk children.

The acquisition of MedImmune by AstraZeneca three years ago signaled the company’s commitment to increasing it biologics offerings in its historically-traditional small molecule drug pipeline. While the reasons for the company’s decision to build a second plant in Frederick aren’t entirely clear, it is great news for Maryland’s expanding commitment to biotechnology. There are approximately 350 biotechnology companies doing business in the state.

The addition of over 250 biotechnology and manufacturing jobs is certain to stimulate the Maryland economy; something that other big pharma companies have been reluctant to do. Investing in biomanufacturing is something that can help the US reinvigorate its moribund manufacturing sector. And, whether you believe it or not, the US is still second-to-none when it comes to manufacturing biologics and other biotechnology products.

Hat tip to MedImmune for the bold move!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!! (try Maryland)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For the past several days, the rumor mill has been rampant with suggestions that UK-based Shire may acquire Cubist, a publicly traded Massachusetts-based biotechnology company that sells Cubicin, an antibiotic indicated for the treatment of certain infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

Rumor has it that Shire approached Cubist about a month ago with a $44.5-a-share proposal ($2.0 billion) and the pair have been in talks about a deal ever since. Last week, Shire announced that it had entered into a deal to acquire private-held Advanced BioHealing for $750 million. Connecticut-based Advanced BioHealing markets and develops products to enhance wound healing and treat diabetic foot infections in patients with diabetes. Shire’s acquisition of both companies would provide it with a substantial US presence in the antibacterial treatment and diabetes markets.

While Cubist may be a good “fit” for Shire, it is not clear whether or not the company will prevail in its takeover bid. Last month, Cubist settled a patent dispute Teva Pharmaceuticals over Cubicin, which lessened the threat of generic competition by the Israeli drug maker. This sparked speculation among a number of Wall Street analysts that other pharmaceutical companies including AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson who are themselves facing generic competition, may consider acquiring Cubist in an attempt to add new antibiotics to their antibacterial portfolios. 

This is not the first time that analysts have speculated that Cubicin may be ripe for acquisition. Almost two years ago, word-on-the-street had it that Novartis may acquire the company. Nevertheless, Cubist is one of the few remaining publicly-traded biotechnology companies that specialize in new antibacterial drug discovery. Its potential acquisition by a big pharma company may signal the end of innovative drug discovery in the antibiotics discovery space. Here’s hoping that Cubist remains independent!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The loss of patent protection and a decline in revenues for a number of blockbuster brand name antibiotics has caused many big pharmaceutical companies to exit the antibacterial drug discovery market. The three remaining big pharma companies still actively engaged in antibacterial research are GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca and Novartis (all European owned companies).

A new report by UK-based Datamonitor entitled “Forecast Insight: Antibacterials” predicts that antibiotic sales revenues will decline from $19.6 billion in 2009 to about $16.4 billion in 2019. Not surprisingly, the report blames the projected decline on generic competition and the lack of new antibiotic launches over the past 10 years.

At present, the top seven antibiotic markets in the world include the US, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK. According to Datamonitor’s analyses, total sales in these markets have fallen by about 1.6 percent annually since 2005 and will continue to decline by almost 2.0 percent a year through 2019. In 2009, three antibiotics had sales of about or more than $1.0 billion; Johnson & Johnson’s Levaquin (market leader), and Pfizer’s Zosyn, and Zyvox. Interestingly, Pfizer recently decided to shut down its US-based antibacterial drug discovery program and move it to China and Johnson & Johnson recently announced that it was getting out of the antibiotic discovery business. 

Big pharma’s decision to abandon antibiotic research could not have come at a worse time. The incidence of antibiotic resistance among both Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria is rising at unprecedented rates. And while safe and effective treatments for Gram positive infections including MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) still exist, the number of treatment options to treat Gram negative infections caused by Acinetobacter spp, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and enteric bacteria is severely limited. The recent description and rapid spread of a beta-lactamase enzyme called NDM-1 that inactivates the antibiotic carbapenem—the last safe and effective antibiotic to universally treat infections caused by Gram negative bacteria —is extremely troubling and worrisome.

While much of the focus over the last decade was on MRSA, infections caused by untreatable, multiple drug resistant Gram negative bacteria will pose the greatest public health threat over the next 10 years. Unfortunately, it is much harder to develop new antibiotic treatments for Gram negative infections as compared with ones caused by Gram positive bacteria. Further, at present, most of the companies that remain in the antibiotic space continue to focus on new treatment for MRSA and related bacteria. Consequently, new treatments for Gram negative infections may be more than a decade away!

Finally, like MRSA, most infections caused by multiple drug resistant Gram negative bacteria are nosocomial in nature (although the incidence of community acquired infections is also on the rise). This means that the most likely place to become infected with these bacteria is institutionalized healthcare settings including hospitals and nursing homes.

In the past, we have relied on pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to discover new antibiotic treatments. The decision of many of these companies to leave the antibacterial space for purely financial reasons is unfortunate and regrettable. However, the growing incidence of antibiotic resistance among both Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria suggests that new antibiotics are necessary and that alternate approaches to new antibiotic drug discovery must be implemented. Whether this is through public/private partnerships or strictly through government programs is irrelevant. The bottom line is that we need new antibiotics; and if they are not discovered soon, many patients will die from previously treatable bacterial infections!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (start an antibiotic drug discovery company)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The life sciences industry is all a-Twitter (sorry) about social media and its implications for future business opportunities. Nevertheless, despite the obvious “upside” of social media, as is always the case in the pharmaceutical industry, most companies don’t want to be the first to do anything innovative or novel (go figure).  

Obviously, there are many risks associated with being first in anything. But, the aversion to being first in the industry to “rock the boat” is more pronounced in the pharmaceutical industry than in most others. That said, companies like Novo Nordisk (the first successful promotional product Twitter campaign), Johnson and Johnson ( the first company to blog) and Boehringer Ingelheim (using Twitter for conversational purposes not just a corporate news feed) at various times, dared to go where no company has gone before with the social media experiment. And, despite the apprehension and almost palpable trepidation exhibited by these companies, no overt consequences have resulted from the bold moves made by these social media pioneers. It now appears that there is another new benchmark for companies involved in the pharmaceutical social media experiment; the first ever sponsored pharma Twitter Chat held by @AstraZenecaUS.

This event was first reported (as far as I can tell) by Mark Senak, the author of the informative EyeonFDA blog and one of the leading pharmaceutical social media watchdogs. The Twitter Chat (under the hash tag #rxsave) was held by @AstraZeneca to discuss with its followers ways in which patients can save money on prescription drugs. While I didn’t participate in this somewhat paradoxical chat —a prescription drug companies discussing ways in which patients may save money on their expensive prescription drugs? —it does demonstrate willingness on AstraZeneca’s part to interact with prospective customers in a meaningful way to help them overcome financial barriers to access to potentially life- altering or-saving prescription drugs!

Although there are still no regulatory guidelines governing the use of social media by life sciences companies, the willingness of @AstraZenecaUS to put itself on the line is very refreshing. In my opinion, it is an important first step to help to “humanize” pharmaceutical companies. Also, it demonstrates a willingness by a pharmaceutical company to provide help to persons who perhaps cannot afford or are struggling to gain access to the prescription drugs that they need!

Hat tip and kudos to @AstraZenecaUS!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Over the past few years, life sciences companies have shed over 200,000 jobs. Unfortunately, downsizing at some of these companies may not be over yet. Nevertheless, companies are always looking to recruit new talent to keep up with normal job turnover rates or to replace highly specialized employees whose skills sets are essential to successfully running the business. Because many of these former life sciences employees possessed special or arcane talents and skill sets, advertising for their replacements using conventional methods like job boards and print ad advertising have historically met with limited success. The advent of social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter have prompted HR professionals and hiring managers at some life sciences companies to test social media as a recruitment tool.

While Facebook may come to mind as the most likely social media tool for this purpose, it isn’t! This is because Facebook is primarily a social, not a professional network like LinkedIn or BioCrowd. Further, despite Facebook’s gargantuan size, the lack of real time interaction coupled with the sheer volume of updates, ads, activities and games at the site render it largely ineffective as a job advertising or recruiting tool.

Twitter, on the other hand, is an ideal medium to advertise jobs and attract new talent. This is because information that is broadcasted on Twitter has the potential to reaches large numbers of persons very rapidly. Moreover, regular Twitter users pay attention to activity on their feeds and like to “retweet” information that they find useful or helpful to their followers. Finally, many Twitter users regularly cull their follower lists to more accurately reflect their interests which suggest that the quality/focus of most follower lists on Twitter far surpasses that of friend networks on Facebook. For example, I manage the @BioCrowd Twitter feed. To that end, I decide who BioCrowd follows and wants to follow. And, not surprisingly, I only follow or allow individuals to follow BioCrowd  who are interested or work in the life sciences. Currently, BioCrowd has over 1,300 followers, all of whom work or are involved in some aspect of the life sciences industry. Because, I have intentionally created a highly specialized network of life sciences professionals, the likelihood of a prospective employer finding a “right fit” candidate by tweeting a job ad to the BioCrowd network greatly increases. Further, the ability of Twitter users to direct the job tweet to specific followers or retweet it preserves the longevity of the ad and improves its effectiveness. And, perhaps the best thing about using Twitter as a job announcement platform is that it is free!

The use of social media as a recruiting and retention tool by Fortune 500 companies like American Express, Best Buy and others is not new. However, its use as a recruitment platform by life sciences companies is very new to the life sciences companies. As many you may know, the life sciences industry has been slow to adopt the use of social media. Nevertheless, several companies like Merck (@merckcareers1) and AstraZeneca (@JoinAstraZeneca and @AstraZeneca Jobs) have decided to boldly go where no other pharmaceutical companies have gone before and are beginning to experiment with Twitter as a recruiting tool.  

About a year ago, I wrote a post that suggested that social media would be an ideal recruitment and retention tool for most life sciences companies. The fact that a couple of companies are testing this idea suggests that my idea may be a good one! 

If you know of other companies using Twitter to recruit new employees, please leave a comment or contact me.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (@BioCrowd)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Unlike most of its competitors, which are downsizing operations, the Swiss drug maker Novartis yesterday announced plans to double the size of a planned office and laboratory complex in Cambridge, MA. A company spokesperson said that the expansion which will cost $600 million was part of a plan to bolster Novartis’ research operations and strengthen partnerships with local universities and biotechnology start ups. 

Novartis, Cambridge, MA largest corporate employer, expects to hire an additional 200 to 300 employs over the next five years increasing the size of its workforce in the city to 2,300.

Cambridge has become a something of a Mecca to pharmaceutical companies looking to tap into scientific information and intellectual property at Harvard and MIT and forging alliances or partnerships with early-stage biotechnology companies. In addition to the Novartis Research Institute, other companies in and around Cambridge include Sanofi-Aventis—which, last summer, unveiled a $65 million expansion in Cambridgeport that will house a new cancer research division and create 300 new jobs—AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Shire and Pfizer.

In addition to its plan to expand operations and R&D capability in Cambridge, Novartis has agreed to build a $1.0 billion complex of offices and laboratories in Shanghai, China. Novartis like most other big pharma companies is trying to leverage scientific information and talent anywhere in the world to bolster their rapidly dwindling drug pipelines. 

The upside of Novartis’ Cambridge project is that it will help to create new construction, support and additional pharmaceutical jobs and help the city weather ongoing recessionary times. Who knows; maybe this is a sign that the US economy is growing and good times may be just around the corner!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (I highly recommend Cambridge MA)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The pharmaceutical industry, not unlike all big business during the disastrous Bush Administration, was virtually unregulated. Bush and his cronies managed to accomplish this feat by destabilizing the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and essentially hamstringing any regulatory authority that it had. Not surprisingly, many pharmaceutical companies saw an opportunity to increase their bottom lines by engaging in off label marketing of many of their approved drugs—a practice clearly forbidden by the agency. 

Despite the fact that off label marketing is illegal, many big pharma companies knowingly and willfully engaged in the practice. Luckily, the Obama administration has reinvigorated and restored the regulatory powers at the agency and FDA is now aggressively investigating and punishing companies that had promoted off-label use of their products over the last decade.

The New York Times today reported that Novartis joins a growing list of pharmaceutical companies that have settled government investigations into health care fraud in the last few years, including Pfizer, which paid $2.3 billion; Eli Lilly, $1.4 billion; Allergan, $600 million; AstraZeneca, $520 million; Bristol-Myers Squibb, $515 million; and Forest Laboratories, $313 million. Pfizer, Lilly, Allergan and Forest pleaded guilty to crimes in the cases. The company was fined $422 million settle criminal and civil investigations into the marketing of the antiseizure medicine Trileptal and five other drugs. 

According to the article, the five other drugs involved in the civil settlement are Diovan, a hypertension drug that is the company’s top-selling product, at $6 billion last year; Sandostatin, a drug to treat a growth hormone disorder that had worldwide sales of $1.2 billion last year; Exforge, a hypertension drug that sold $671 million; Tekturna, a blood pressure medicine that sold $290 million; and Zelnorm, a medicine for irritable bowel syndrome and constipation that was later withdrawn from the United States market.

It is important to make a distinction between the practices of off-label drug use and off label marketing. As many of you may know, licensed US physicians are allowed to prescribe any FDA-approved drugs if they believe that their use will benefit patients. This is off-label drug use. However, in contrast, it is illegal for companies to actively promote or market approved drugs for therapeutic indications for which they have not received regulatory approval. This is off-label marketing and a strategy that has been used by companies to increase sales of approved products without having to spend money on expensive clinical trials that are required to prove safety and efficacy for a new drug to gain regulatory approval. While this may be a backdoor strategy for companies to boost product sales, it clearly puts patients at risk because the actual safety and efficacy for the indications has not been adequately tested and proven.

Many drug makers have been critical of FDA’s increase scrutiny of drug safety and have argued that it has negatively impacted the regulatory approval rates of new experimental medicines. While this may be troubling to many pharmaceutical executives, the FDA was created to insure that all approved drugs are safe and effective and the risk to Americans who use them is minimal. In other words, the agency is simply doing its job—something it was prevented from doing for the past eight years!

Until next time,

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The past couple of weeks have been awful for employees at AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline after both companies announced massive worldwide layoffs. Interestingly, the downsizing that has taken place at Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) in recent years has escaped notice; mainly because media attention has been focused on the sale of two of its non-pharmaceutical divisions, Convatec and Mead Johnson. The sale of these two divisions brought in roughly $8.0 billion giving BMS one of the largest cash reserves among major pharmaceutical companies. 

BMS announced two years ago that is would cut its global work force by 10 percent by 2011. Layoffs and cost cutting measures at BMS have been mainly driven by the impending patent expiry of the blockbuster anti-clotting agent Plavix and several other drugs. Plavix reportedly accounts for a disproportionate amount of the company’s annual sale revenues. Despite its new found largess, the company continues to eliminate jobs and shed employees. To make matters worse, BMS confirmed today (as reported on both Pharmalot and the WSJ Health Blog) that it will eliminate pay raises in 2010 for the people who still have jobs at the company. Luckily, bonuses were not eliminated. But as most people who work at big companies will tell you, bonuses are not guaranteed and discretionary. Check out the 2008 total compensation packages (salary, stock options, stock awards, pension etc).

While I don’t profess to have the credentials to be the CEO of a major pharmaceutical company, it doesn’t make sense to me to freeze the salaries of employees who are already overly anxious about whether or not they will have jobs when the next round of layoffs take place. Isn’t morale already bad enough?  Does management think employees will be at the top of their games and willing to work hard if they are constantly worrying whether or not tomorrow may be their last day of work?  Of course, naysayers will say that BMS employees should suck it up because they at least have jobs. However, I contend that management ought to invest a portion of the $8.0 billion in its employees rather then use it to buy several more companies to convince Wall Street analysts that BMS is truly a “next generation biopharmaceutical company.”  After all, employees are any company’s most valuable asset!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Britain’s largest pharmaceutical company today announced it plans on slashing 4,000 jobs over the coming months. The bulk of the cuts will be in America and Europe, and are part of the company’s efforts to shift resources away from low-growth territories into parts of the world with greater scope to expand sales, most notably Asia. GSK’s currently employs 99,000 workers worldwide. The reduction in headcount will be combined with a drive to make the company’s research and development more cost-efficient. 

While the job losses will not be as severe as those announced last week by its rival Astra Zeneca, they will provide further depressing news for a sector that is fighting to contain costs as it reduces its reliance on big-selling blockbuster drugs, many of whose patents will expire in the next two to three years.

The pipeline of new drugs at GSK is much deeper than at many of its rivals, say industry analysts. The company’s roster of planned launches includes Menhibrix, a vaccine to combat meningitis, and Benlysta (belimumab), a novel, monoclonal antibody treatment for systemic lupus erythematosus that it is co-developing with Maryland-based, Human Genome Sciences. In total, the group has more than 30 products in the advanced stages of development and testing.

While GSK continues to develop new drugs, it has increasingly been turning to emerging markets to find and sustain corporate growth. This has meant that thousands of jobs have already been sacrificed in the West, although the company is adding staff elsewhere. For example, it recently cut 2,000 sales jobs in America but added 1,500 staff in China. Also, GSK’s vaccine division has suffered a few regulatory setbacks with its pneumococcal vaccine Synflorix and its cervical cancer vaccine Cervarix. The loss of market share in these areas has put additional financial pressure on the company.

Like many of its competitors, GSK is looking to other divisions of the company to cover projected losses in the pharmaceutical sector. Recently, GSK has shifted a lot of its attention to its consumer products division, which owns brands such as Lucozade and Ribena soft drinks, Aquafresh and Sensodyne toothpaste, and over-the-counter medicines such as Panadol painkillers and Alli, a weight-loss pill. Analysts predict the division will have raised its annual sales 18% to £4.7 billion. A deal signed last year to increase sales of Lucozade in China has provided the blueprint for how the company would like to develop the consumer healthcare side of its business.

Similarly, last week, Sanofi-Aventis, a French rival, announced a joint venture with Minsheng Pharmaceutical Group, a Chinese company, to sell vitamin pills and nutritional supplements. Also, Pfizer recently announced it would bid for the possibility of purchasing the financially-troubled German generics manufacturer Ratiopharm; signaling the possibility that the world's largest branded pharmaceutical manager may be toying with the idea of getting into the generics business.

Late last year I predicted that more pharmaceutical company employees would loss their jobs. Sadly, this prediction has come true. That said, I am surprised at the scope and size of the layoffs that have already taken place in 2010. I suspect that more layoffs are likely in the near future if the economy doesn’t turn around anytime soon.

Hat tip to Ed at the Pharmalot blog!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try medical devices or biotech)!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

AstraZeneca PLC said today it , or 12 percent of its work force, by 2014 to cut costs as it reported disappointing fourth quarter earnings. The job cuts will be made across all regions and divisions and were necessary because some of the company’s major products including the child asthma medication Pulmicort, which made sales of $1.3 billion in 2009, and breast cancer treatment Arimidex, with $1.92 billion in sales will be losing patent protection in the near future.

CEO David Brennan said the company was extending a cost-cutting program it launched in 2007, which had saved the company $1.6 billion annually at the end of 2009.Extending the program out to 2014 will cost another $2 billion, with expected benefits of $1.9 billion a year by 2014, he said.

Around 12,600 jobs having already been eliminated under the program, although Brennan suggested that the net figure was closer to 4,600 after new roles were created by the company, which employs around 63,000 people worldwide.

The new round of cuts will be global, including sales and marketing, business infrastructure, research and development and the supply chain. The company’s research & development division will lose about 1,800 jobs and according to Brennan there may be some closures of research and development sites or facilities as part of the restructuring. The company is reported to be waiting for regulatory approval of five new products.

Despite claims that the US economy is improving, big pharma continues to downsize its R&D workforce. Call me crazy, but aren’t these the same companies that argue that healthcare reform will stifle innovation and hinder new drug discovery? This begs the question: how do you discover new and novel medicines and treatments if the people who discover and develop drugs no longer work at your company? There is always outsourcing and M&A I suppose.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I think the economy must be improving because I am beginning to receive e-mail blasts from big pharma companies like Roche and AstraZeneca that they are hiring again (Please see the e-mail message below).  This may be a good sign for R&D scientists who have been struggling to find gainful employment.

In the spirit of full disclosure I have never worked nor am I am employed by AstraZeneca and I am not being compensated for this advertisement. I am simply a nice guy trying to help out my fellow scientists (hmm, I recall hearing something about nice guys.....)  However, I must warn you that just because companies advertise that they are hiring doesn't always mean that they really are.  Please keep that in mind when you apply for positions that AZ is advertising.

New R&D career opportunities at AstraZeneca. At AstraZeneca, your research and development experience can make a world of difference. That's because you'll be a part of a leading global pharmaceutical company with one of the most influential portfolios of innovative pharmaceutical brands. We continuously challenge, discover and develop new medicines in order to improve the quality of people's lives. It's an ongoing quest that involves the talent, ideas and growth of all our professionals, as we strive to advance the future of healthcare. Today, we're seeking qualified candidates to join our passionate culture in our Research and Development area. It's your opportunity to utilize your expertise for a greater purpose, while you're supported every step of the way. We encourage knowledge, respect growth and believe that there's always more to learn. It's one of the reasons why you'll become colleagues with some of the most talented and experienced professionals in the industry. As part of the Monster research and development professionals network, we invite you to learn more and apply for one of our research and development opportunities today. Sincerely, The AstraZeneca Human Resources team Learn More & Apply If you would like to stay current on AstraZeneca, you can sign up to receive more information here: www.IWantToAdvanceMyCareer.com AstraZeneca is an equal opportunity employer.

Good Luck!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The New York Times reported today that AstraZeneca has agreed to pay $520 million to settle two federal investigations and two whistle blower lawsuits over the sale, marketing and off-label promotion of its blockbuster antipsychotic drug Seroquel. Despite this settlement, UK-based AstraZeneca still must contend with 14,444 civil lawsuits filed by many patients who developed diabetes and other health related conditions because of misleading marketing that failed to adequately disclose that the drug caused abnormal weight gain.                     

AstraZeneca joins a growing list of pharmaceutical companies that have been penalized for off label promotion and misleading advertising. Earlier this year Eli Lilly & Co paid $1.4 billion over its marketing of another antipsychotic drug Zyprexa and Pfizer announced that it would pay $2.3 billion including a record-breaking criminal fine of $1.195 billion mostly for its painkiller Bextra which was withdrawn from the market.

Despite the size of the fines and settlement figures for these recent cases, they are a drop in the bucket when compared with the amount of money generated by illicit marketing and advertising. For example, the $520 million that AstraZeneca has agreed to pay to settle the Seroquel case pales in comparison to the $17 billion that the drug has generated in US sales since 2004. The same was true for Zyprexa and Bextra.

While these settlements cannot repair much of the damage that has been done to unknowing patients, it signals that the US government is beginning to live up to its pledge to provide safe and efficacious medicines to the American public.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Pharmalot Blog reported today that AstraZeneca offered all of it sales representatives—numbering 5,000-6,000—a buyout option. However, AstraZeneca prefers to avoid the term buyout and instead instructed its reps to ’self identify’ whether or not they want a package to leave the company. According to the post, an AstraZeneca spokesman declined to discuss how many reps it would like to shed, but did provide this statement:

“AstraZeneca is making changes to our sales force, which will be managed first by looking at vacancies and offering field sales employees the opportunity to self-identify whether they are interested in leaving the company. We will know the full scope of the changes in the coming weeks.”

Like many other pharma companies, AstraZeneca will lose $11.1 billion in patented-protected revenue by the end of 2012 and face stiff generic competition.

Pharma sales reps, like R&D scientists, have been facing tough times over the past three years or so. In the late 1990s, pharma companies hired massive numbers of reps, only to realize several years later, that increasing the number of reps didn’t necessarily translate into increase drug sales. The economic downturn, coupled with projected loss of revenues due to patent expiry of blockbuster drugs over the next few years, provided pharma with an opportunity to downsize. Finally, the growing use of web-based strategies to educate physicians, contract sales forces and a diminishing number of products led to the demise of the pharma rep as we know it.

My recommendation to downsized reps is to get some biotechnology training or device/diagnostic training and to try and leverage previous experience into sales jobs at biotechnology and devices companies. Both industries have enormous growth potential and the transition from pharma to them shouldn’t be all that onerous.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Mark Sendak, author of the incisive EyeonFDA blog and social media enthusiast, has been keeping a watchful eye (pun intended) on the growing number of pharmaceutical companies that are adding channels and videos to YouTube. 

On his blog today, Mark reviews several new channels developed by Novartis, Johnson and Johnson, Teva, Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca. While a growing number of pharmaceutical companies continue to add new channels on YouTube, Mark contends that the “success of these channels has varied greatly and several companies have obviously developed the channels without any idea of what they would like to do with them and some of the channels show obvious signs of neglect.”

To learn more about pharma’s incursion on YouTube, read Mark’s post!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Video Watching

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Twitter, which is currently de rigueur in social media circles, is emerging as one of the most powerful branding and marketing social media tool that has been developed to date.   While other industries are already exploiting Twitter’s powerful marketing reach (to hawk their wares), drug makers have been reluctant to adopt Twitter and most other forms of social media. Industry analysts and company insiders contend that pharma’s reluctance to adopt social media can be attributed to the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) lack of guidance on its use for promotional purposes. At present, it is anybody’s guess when this guidance may be issued, if ever.

Nevertheless, as always, there are a few daring companies willing to “boldly go where no pharma company has gone before”—in this case—Twitter! These companies include Boehringer Ingelheim (BI), Astra Zeneca, Novartis and Pfizer. According to a post on the Advance Market WoRx blog, BI is leading the way among pharma company Twitterers, with 679 following, 745 followers and 47 tweets. AstraZenecaUS has 136 following, 440 followers and 22 tweets. Pfizer has 351 following, 462 followers and 48 tweets.  Novartis has 0 following, 681 followers and 40 tweets (I guess Novartis has a thing” against following people).

Unlike its fellow pharma Twitters, BI—which began using Twitter in November 2008—actually uses it as an interactive and conversational microblogging platform (as it was intended). The other pharma company Twitters use it almost exclusively “as a one-way PR feed” says Ellen Hoenig Carlson at Advance Market WoRx. According to a post on the Pharmafocus website, "Boehringer has incorporated Twitter into its wider communications strategy and is using the site regularly to engage its stakeholders. In addition to posting press releases, BI uses Twitter to recommend web-based information about therapeutic areas and articles that its followers might find interesting or useful. To keep its finger on the pulse of the Twitterverse, BI uses media scanning programs to help monitor online conversations and responds quickly to join in or start up Twitter conversations.”

Kudos to Boehringer for recognizing Twitter’s potential to communicate with patients, physicians and other interested parties. I hope that more pharmaceutical companies begin to use Twitter and other forms of social media to engage and improve communications with their stakeholders.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Twittering (or should it be Tweeting?) 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link