Trouble in Big Pharma Land: Lilly Freezes Employee Salaries

The Pharmalot blog reported today that Eli Lilly & Co one of the more progressive big pharma companies to experiment with crowdsourcing and social media to generate new R&D opportunities today announced that it most company employees and executives will not receive base pay increases this year. The company did not announce a freeze in bonuses, however.

In a sign of solidarity with the 99 %, John Lechleiter, PhD Lilly’s outspoken and sometimes controversial CEO, requested that he not receive an increase to his $1.5 million annual salary and incentives. Interesting, as Ed Silverman cogently points out in the Pharmalot post, Lechleiter’s bonus target is 140% of his base salary which put his total compensation for the upcoming year at around $16.4 million!

Last week, the company disclosed that it missed analyst’s stock price estimates and its leading product Zyprexa (antipsychotic) yielded lower than expected sales revenues because of generic competition. Zyprexa sales dropped 44 percent in the fourth-quarter to $749.6 million.

Don’t be surprised if layoffs are next. It may be time for Lilly employees to dust off those CVs and resumes.

Until next time...

 

Everything You Need to Know About Hiring Contractors

While I spend most of my time as a freelancer, I sometimes will do contract work because the pay is good and the hours are reasonable. As many of you know by now, using contractors rather than hiring new employees has become the new way of controlling costs and keeping the full time headcount low. After all, paying someone an hour wage without covering insurance and other employee benefits costs can be huge savings to companies trying to maintain competitiveness and cut costs.

During my various stints as a contract employee, I learned that the rules governing the hiring of contractors vary widely from company to company and agency to agency. Consequently, there are a lot of myths, urban legends and misinformation regarding hiring contractors and the obligations of employers to them. Admittedly, I am a bit confused about the rules surrounding hiring and employing contractors despite the fact that I have been a contractor on more than three occasions. 

For those of you who may be confused as me or others who simply want to learn more about contracting, I highly recommend an article by Katherine Reynolds Lewis in the small business section of the NY Times entitled “Hiring Contractors Without Getting Into Trouble.”

The article offers a comprehensive overview of the Federal laws governing contractor hiring practices, the challenges of a contractor workforce and how to maximize the effectiveness of contract employees. Despite its obvious employer bias, it does paint a realistic view of what persons interested in contract work will likely encounter in the workplace.

Until next time....

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

 

Regulatory Affairs Update; FDA 483 and Warning Letters Trends for 2012

Those of you who manufacture products approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are well aware of the importance of complying with Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) during FDA mandated inspections of your manufacturing facilities. Failure to comply with cGMP requirements during an inspections results in the issuance of 483s. And if you fail to adequately address the concerns of the agency outlined in 483s, it may ultimately result in issuance of warning letter to your company.

FDA is more vigilant and aggressive than ever before with its 483 and warning letter enforcement procedures. In the words of Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, FDA is quick, visible and vigilant.  With this in mind, it may be worthwhile to participate in a webinar offered by Expert Briefings.com entitled “Top Compliance Trends for 483 and Warning Letters for 2012—Based on Rare FDA Data.”

The webinar will be held on March 8, 2012 from 2:00-3:30 PM EST and Dennis Moore, Managing Partner, AUK Technical Services and a 28 year veteran FDA investigator will lead it. 

Topics to be covered include:

  • Top warning letter trends for 2012, such as more 806 enforcement
  • The Top 10 QS 483 Observations for 2010 and 2011
  • Most common quality system failures for drugs for 2010
  • Top drug and device citations in 483s for 2010
  • Top drug and device warning letter citations for 2010
  • Total 2010 BIMO inspections for CDER, CBER, CDRH, and CVM
  • Details on clinical investigator, sponsor/monitor and IRB audits for 2010
  • Most common sponsor deficiencies for 2010
  • The rising trend of ‘cease to market’ letters, one of which hit a NY pharma company in 2011
  • The total number of 483s issued in 2010 and 2011 – an all time high
  • Total CAPA 483 observations in 2010
  • How long to receive a warning letter, based upon which offices issues it
  • 483 inspection targets for drugs and devices for 2010, 2011, and 2012
  • Total warning letters issued by drug and device category in 2010
  • Which district offices write the most warning letters
  • How long to receive a warning letter, based upon issuing office
  • Warning letters issued by QS system for 2010
  • 483s broken down by QS subsystem for 2010
  • Warning letters by CFR section
  • Top device 483 observations for 2010
  • Details on process validation observations for 2010
  • Design control 483 observations by category for 2010
  • Click here to visit Expertbriefings.com.

Click here to visit Expertbriefings.com.

I hope to see (hear ?) you at the webinar!

 

Emerging Opportunities for US Pharma and Biotech Sales Reps

Since 2001 many major pharmaceutical companies have been restructuring their sales forces and laying off reps to reduce redundancies, improve efficiencies and cut costs. This downsizing, which likely peaked about a year ago, is mainly in response to the projected loss of sales revenue as many blockbuster drugs lose patent protection over the next three years or so. For example, products like Lipitor, Plavix and Zyprexa that currently generate more than $142 billion in sales are expected to face stiff generic competition in the very near future.

Nevertheless, while many pharma companies are restructuring their sales forces, there is a growing demand for new reps at speciality pharma, biotechnology and generic drug companies. Unlike their pharma counterparts, the new reps are more specialized and require additional training to better understand how to maximize sales of increasingly complex products in both developed and emerging life sciences markets.  

One organization, National Association of Pharmaceutical Representatives (NAPRx), a trade organization that provides continuing education, certifications and career development for its members is helping to usher in the era of pharmaceutical and biotechnology sales reps. To that end, NAPRx has embarked on an aggressive advertising campaign to help to recruit and match sales representative with drug companies who are hiring. Many sales jobs are open throughout the US. Jobs are available in small cities like Littlerock, AR, Milwaukee, WI and Baton Rouge, LA as well as larger cities including Pittsburgh, PA, Los Angeles, CA,Boston, MA, Honolulu, HI and San Diego, CA. Starting salaries range from $65 to $85 K. For more information about other job openings please visit the BioJobCenter. 

In a previous blog post, I suggested that a career as a sales rep may represent viable alternate career opportunities for PhD-trained scientists who have an interest in sales and aren’t averse to earning a living selling drugs to physicians and other healthcare providers. Because of the complexity of newly approved biotechnology and speciality pharma products, drug makers are beginning to understand that persons with a strong background in molecular biology, immunology and pharmacology will be required to help to sell their products to physicians, hospitals and other healthcare organizations. That said, sespite the recent reductions in R &D for new drug development, there will always be a need for drug makers to sell their products! After all, selling drugs is how these companies remain in business. 

For more information about a career in pharmaceutical and biotechnology sales please visit the NAPRx website.

Until next time... 

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

 

AstraZeneca Sheds 7,300 Jobs

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!!!!!!!!!

 

BioJobBlog Surpasses the 2.0 Million Reader Mark!

I started BioJobBlog in 2007 primarily as a means for me to express myself about life science careers and issue and challenges confronting the biotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical devices industry. That said, I never thought that BioJobBlog would ever amount to much; it was simply a vehicle for me to rant and rave about things that were important to me! It is a daunting challenge to begin a blog with no readers and then realize that 5 years later over 2.0 million unique readers have visited to read my thoughts and ideas about a wide breadth of topics.

I want to thank the readers who continue to visit BioJobBlog. And, I hope that what I have written over the past five years has either helped or induced you to think about issues in the life sciences industry. While I have no plans to stop blogging; my schedule is becoming increasingly challenging and I can no longer post articles as frequently as I have in the past. Nevertheless, I will continue do what I can to keep the content at BioJobBlog interesting, fresh and thought-provoking. 

Please feel free to contact me with ideas, thoughts or comments about the blog (or anything else for that matter). 

Thanks for supporting BioJobBlog!

Until next time...

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

 

Monthly Pharma Layoff Report

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!!!!!!

 

Abbott Slashes 700 Jobs From Its Medical Devices and Diagnostics Unit

Chicago-based Abbott Laboratories today announced that it would lay off 700 employees from its medical devices and diagnostics division as part of an ongoing restructuring effort. 

Most of the layoffs will take place in the Chicago area and affect employees that manufacture the company’s cardiovascular stents and diagnostic tests. According to a company spokesperson approximately 500 persons who work in stent manufacturing and 200 who work in diagnostics will lose their jobs.

The restructuring of Abbott’s manufacturing operations began several years ago and about this time last year the company layed off about 1,900 employees in Lake County, Illinois.

In October, Abbott surprised investors and analysts with the announcement that it would spin off its branded drug business, including Humira (psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis) it’s largest selling branded pharmaceutical product. Company executives argued that the split would allow stakeholders and investors to separately and more accurately value Abbott’s other less risky businesses which include nutritional (baby) formula, generic drugs and medical devices and diagnostics.

Despite signs of economic recovery, it appears that layoffs are still occurring at a pretty good clip at many pharma and biotech companies. It now appears that medical devices and diagnostic company employees, who were once immune to downsizing and reorganization, are now fair game.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Is There Any Wonder Why Big Pharma Has a PR Problem?

Disposing of unused prescription and over the counter drugs including antibiotics, antidepressants, anticonvulsants and birth control pills by dumping them down the toilet has contaminated the drinking water supply for 41 million Americans. Further, unused prescription drugs stockpiled in medicine cabinets can contribute to drug abuse or overdoses by children, teens and adults. Currently, there are no guidelines or regulations in place to deal with the safe disposal of unused consumer medicines and drugs.

According to a post on today’s Pharmalot blog, a Washington State senator is introducing legislation (for the fourth time) to develop an environmental safe plan to dispose of unused and potentially harmful medications. The plan calls for dropping off unused medicines at local pharmacies; a service that would be underwritten by the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture the drugs. And, wouldn’t you know it, PhRMA, the pharmaceutical industry trade groups is lobbying and fighting against the legislation for the fourth time. In addition to PhRMA, the Consumer Health Products Associations which represents manufacturers of over-the-counter drug and the Washington Biotechnology and Biomedical Association are fighting the proposed legislation. Some municipalities like the City of Puyallup, WA allow persons to dispose of prescription medications including cancer treatments, painkillers, antidepressants and statins in lock boxes in the hallway of the local police department. However, these municipalities are the exception not the norm.

The groups opposing the legislation contend that regulations are unnecessary because contaminating drugs found in drinking water results not from improper disposal practices but through urination and defecation. In fact, they contend that the best way to dispose of unused medicines is in the household trash. But what about leeching of these drugs from landfills into aquifers and other sources of drinking water you ask? And what about dealing with potential drug abuse and sale of illegal prescription drugs? 

Interestingly, I had some minor surgery last week that required some pain medication and as I was rummaging through my medicine cabinet, I found a at least eight bottles of pain medication prescribed for various family members dating back to 1999. I thought about getting rid of the expired pills, but I had no idea about what the best disposal method may be. Consequently, the pill collection is still taking up space in my medicine cabinet. And, with two teenagers in the house, I am starting to get a little anxious! 

That said, it makes perfect sense to me that there ought to be regulations guiding the disposal of drugs in the US. And, because drug manufacturers have made huge profits on their products, I see no reason why drugmakers should not support and help to underwrite programs to safely dispose of unused prescription and over-the-counter medications. Maybe people’s negative impression of big pharma would improve if the powers at be would just suck it up for once and pay to help to solve problems that helped to create!

Until next time...

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

 

BioJobBlogger Revealed

Ome Ogbru, Pharm. D, CEO and Founder of Rxeconsult, a new networking site for healthcare consulting and jobs, asked me if I would be interested in being interviewed about the companies and websites that I started.  Of course I could not refuse.  So here goes:

 

RxEconsult: What is BioInsights and why did you develop BioInsights?

BioJobBlogger:  BioInsights founded in 1998 was originally a bioscience training and education company.  The goal of the company was to help life scientists get the training that they need to get jobs at life sciences companies. Today, BioInsights, Inc is more of a career development company that provides individualized career development guidance and counseling for life scientists. This is because the life sciences job market has changed considerably since 1998 and jobs are harder to come by. However, we still offer bioscience training in drug development, regulatory affairs and biomanufacturing. Additionally, BioInsights also offer medical communications consulting services.

RxEconsult: How do you distinguish BioInsights from other Medical Communications companies? 

BioJobBlogger: Unlike traditional medical communications companies, BioInsights offers writing services that heavily focus on social media platforms like LinkedIn, Twitter and various blogging platforms.  We also offer medical writing, copywriter and website content development services.

RxEconsult: What are the main challenges in your business and how are you addressing them?

BioJobBlogger: Training and career development services are not high priorities for job candidates or life sciences companies until a scientist is looking for a job or a company needs to hire new employees.  Consequently, it is difficult to convince both companies and jobseekers to be proactive and engage us early in the process. We are beginning to address this problem by turning to various social media platforms to get the word out about our services. Paradoxically, the recent economic downturn has been good for our business activities!

RxEconsult: What attracted you to social media and blogging? How can professionals make a living or develop their career by blogging?

BioJobBlogger:  I enjoy writing and always have had a strong desire to share my ideas and opinions with others. Blogging seemed like a natural extension of what I like to do. So, about 6 years ago I launched BioJobBlog (www.biojobblog.com) which is focused on life sciences career development topics as well as opinion pieces and reports on the goings on in the life sciences industry. While blogging is exciting and extremely cathartic, it is difficult to make a living as a blogger. The days of individual bloggers selling their blogs for millions to large media outlets are over.   That said, blogging is useful in establishing yourself as a subject matter expert which can sometimes lead to paid opportunities.  At its peak last year, I was averaging between 65,000-70,000 unique visitors per month @ BioJobBlog.

I built traffic to the levels I mentioned by blogging 4-5 times per day and staying abreast of late breaking events in the life sciences industry.  I was able to maintain that pace for a couple of years but because I blog for free, I could not sustain the pace any longer. The original goal was to reach 100,000 unique visitors per month and then try to sell the blog or form an alliance with a media outlet. Obviously, that did not happen.  I am now happy to log between 30,000-45,000 unique visitors per month by blogging three times per week or whenever the urge strikes me.

As far as revenue is concerned, it has not been much.  It costs me about $2400 per year in hosting and management fees and I have been blogging for over 5 years.  In that timespan, I may have made several thousand dollars but not enough to break even or turn a profit.  Blogging is truly a personal medium that is driven more by desire and the need to be heard rather than a profitable enterprise; unless of course you can get a major media outlet and blog for them.  That is really my dream job right now!

RxEconsult: What are the top social media practices that professionals should use for developing their career?

BioJobBlogger: I think that LinkedIn, Twitter and a personal blog can really help in terms of career development for life scientists.  However, all of these platforms require daily monitoring and care. Sadly, most life sciences professional spend most of their time in the laboratory and fail to realize that career development is vital and cannot be ignored if one wants to find a job!

RxEconsult: What healthcare gaps can social media address? 

BioJobBlogger:  I believe that social media can be used in real time for adverse event reporting and educational outreach activities. Unfortunately, most drug makers view social media as means to bolster sales or look for specialized employees.  That said, these are early days for life sciences companies and social media and it will interesting to see how social media evolves in the life sciences industry.

RxEconsult: Why are biopharmaceutical companies struggling with leveraging social media and how can they best use social media? How can BioInsights help them?

BioJobBlogger:  The life sciences industry is very conservative and adverse to change.  Social media is clearly a game changing phenomenon and most life sciences companies don’t know what to make of it yet.  Over the past three years or so, more and more life sciences companies have experimented with various social media platforms and are beginning to realize their potential for their businesses.  

BioInsights can help companies navigate the social media jungle because of our experience using social media platforms and also developing life sciences websites and blog content.

RxEconsult: What feedback have you received and how are your websites performing?

BioJobBlogger: I recently redesigned the BioInsights website and traffic has been down. Most of my focus is on two other BioInsights web assets---BioJobBlog and BioCrowd (www.biocrowd.com) an online networking community for bioprofessionals.  

I frequently get comments @BioJobBlog about its content and how helpful it is to jobseekers and other bioprofessionals. BioCrowd was launched about three years ago and we are still growing the community. At present, joining BioCrowd is primarily through invitation only.  We are embarking on a mass membership drive early next spring.  At present there are 4,200 BioCrowd members.

RxEconsult: If you wrote a book about how to develop and run a business what pearls would you include?

BioJobBlogger: No matter how good the idea is, it is all about marketing! Good ideas with insufficient marketing power can easily fail whereas bad ideas with mega-advertising can succeed.  As a scientist myself, I failed to realize how important marketing and advertising are! In hindsight, I would have invested much more money and effort in marketing my business rather developing content and building sleek looking websites!

RxEconsult:BioJobBlogger, thank you for sharing your views and discussing your ventures. Hopefully, you can return to give us an update. I wish you success and I hope you find that dream job!

 To comment on this article or ask questions  join the RxEconsult community, a free business network for healthcare consulting, jobs, and more.

 

Asian Pharmaceutical Giant Takeda To Eliminate 2,800 Jobs in the US and Europe

Asia’s largest drug maker, Takeda, today announced that it will eliminate 2,800 jobs or about 9% of its workforce in the US and Europe. The job cuts, planned over the next four years, are intended to better integrate NycoMed, the Swiss company purchased by Takeda for $12 billion last September.

Most of the positions affected by the downsizing are in the US and Europe and will help the company save $1.7 billion over the next year or so.The plan includes the elimination of 2,100 jobs mainly in Europe and 700 in the U.S. across research, commercial, operations and administrative functions. Takeda currently has about 30,000 employees worldwide with operations in 42 countries.

The reason for the downsizing is slumping US sales of the company’s top selling drug Actos (diabetes) that will lose patent protection this August and face stiff generic competition. Like other pharmaceutical companies, Takeda is abandoning the US and European markets in favor emerging markets in China, India, Brazil and the Middle East.

Until next time...

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

 

Last Call for BDI's Mobile Healthcare Conference

 

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $175.

Date: Thursday, January 26, 2012
Time: 8:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
Place: The Graduate Center of The City University of NY; 365 5th Ave; NY, NY 10016
Registration Fee: $195.00
Website: http://www.bdionline.com/mobilehealthcare2012.html


Representatives from the following companies are currently registered to attend: Affect Strategies; Alembic Health Communications; Allergan; Anderson Direct Marketing; Aurora Information Technology, Inc.; Baldwin Publishing; BlippMedia; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; Brodeur Partners; Care Innovations; Cinchcast; CMI/Compas; ConferencePlus; Daiichi-Sankyo; DKI; Draftfcb Healthcare; DraftFCB/NeON; Edelman; eurorscg; Eveo; FreeMind; GCI Health; Google; Hale Advisors Inc.; hamad medical corporation; Huntington Hospital; HY Connect; IMC2 Health and Wellness; International Association of Business Communicators; Kwittken + Company; Makovsky & Co; Manhattan Research; Mom Central Consulting; Mount Sinai Hospital; MultiVu; NNN; Ogilvy; Padilla Speer Beardsley; Pharma Marketing News / Pharma Marketing Blog; Physicians Interactive; Pixels & Pills; Porter Novelli; PR Newswire; PRN Communications Inc; Public Relations Society of America - New York Chapter; SAY Media; Shire; State University of New York Buffalo; Stephanie Grayson; ToGoRun; Trident Communications; Turning Point Solutions, Inc.; United Healthcare; Velocidi; Wake Forest Baptist Health; WCG; Wharton, University of Pennsylvania; Within3; Yankee Public Relations; and others.

Attendee Testimonials:
Click here to see what our past attendees are saying about us.


About the Event:

Consumers and professionals are increasingly using their mobile devices for healthcare information. They are also interacting with healthcare providers and colleagues on their mobile phones. This conference will demonstrate the best case studies of how major healthcare brands are connecting with consumers and professionals through mobile communications. 

Agenda:

 

8:00 a.m. - 8:30 a.m.

Registration & Networking Breakfast 

8:30 a.m. - 8:40 a.m.

Introductory Comments
Steve Etzler, Founder and CEO, Business Development Institute 

8:40 a.m. - 8:50 a.m.

Introductory Comments
PR Newswire 

8:50 a.m. - 9:15 a.m.

Case Study:  Multiscreen Health 2012 
Presented by: Monique Levy, Vice President, Research, Manhattan Research
Smartphone and tablet adoption jumped significantly between 2010 and 2011. How are consumers and HCPs using multiple screens for health and how can marketers keep pace with this rapidly changing environment? Manhattan Research Vice President Research Monique Levy will discuss key trends from the Taking the Pulse® U.S. and Cybercitizen Health® U.S. studies.

9:15 a.m. - 9:40 a.m.

Case Study: Text in the City
Presented by: Dr. Katherine Malbon, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Adolescent Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital 

Lessons learned from a pilot text messaging program connecting adolescents to their 'health home'. Katie Malbon will discuss her pilot text messaging program that she initiated in a large adolescent health center. She will illustrate the feasibility of the program and how it laid the ground work for other SMS-based programs within the center and beyond.

9:40 a.m. - 10:05 a.m.

Case Study: Successfully Collaborating with Healthcare Professionals through Online Community Programs: A Case Study Approach
Presented by: Peter Gannon, Regional Vice President, Within3 

Fostering collaboration and engagement is everyone's goal in HCP communications. Enabling technologies that accomplish these goals in a regulated environment can be challenging given perceived constraints from legal, regulatory, medical, and compliance. Peter will introduce some successful cases on how the implementation of private secure HCP networks have enabled greater HCP collaboration, increased the quality of HCP relationships, realized cost savings, and were implemented in accordance with company risk mitigation policies.

10:05 a.m. - 10:25 a.m.

Break

10:25 a.m. - 10:35 a.m.

Introductory Comments
Rob Drasin, President, International Association of Business Communicators New York & President, Trident Communications

10:35 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.

Case Study: The Power of Integrating Mobile into the Marketing Mix
Presented by: Jenna Mons, Consumer Product Manager for LAP-BAND®, Allergan 

An overview of the importance mobile can play as a key channel to reach and interact with customers. Looking specifically at how LAP-BAND created a mobile footprint in the 2011 to attract new customers and increase conversion.

11:00 a.m. - 11:25 a.m.

Case Study:
Presented by: John Vieira, Daiichi-Sankyo

11:25 a.m. - 11:50 a.m.

Case Study TBD

11:50 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.

Break

12:00 p.m. - 12:30 p.m.

Roundtable Session 1

12:30 p.m. - 1:00 p.m.

Roundtable Session 2

 

Roundtable Moderators:
Meighan Berberich, Vice President, Marketing, Cinchcast
James Chase, Editor-in-Chief, Medical Marketing & Media
George DeTorres, Divisional Vice President - Business Development, MultiVu
Rob Drasin, President, International Association of Business Communicators New York & President, Trident Communications
Sandra Fathi, President, Public Relations Society of America - New York Chapter & President and Founder, Affect 
Peter Gannon, Regional Vice President, Within3

Scott Hopkins, Executive Vice President, Anderson Direct Marketing
Theresa Jacobellis, Director of Public Affairs, Huntington Hospital 
Monique Levy, Vice President, Research, Manhattan Research

John Mack, Editor and Publisher, Pharma Marketing News / Pharma Marketing Blog 
Dr. Katherine Malbon, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Adolescent Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital
Talya Miron-Shatz, PhD, Marketing Department, Wharton, University of Pennsylvania 
Jenna Mons, Consumer Product Manager for LAP-BAND®, Allergan 
Mario Nacinovich, Jr., Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Communication in Healthcare
Managing Director, AXON
Xavier Petit, Shire

Hotel Sponsor: Hotel 373 is the official hotel of BDI's events.

Sponsors:
PR Newswire / MultiVu; Within3; Anderson Direct Marketing; BioCrowd; Cinchcast; FierceMarkets; International Association of Business Communicators - New York Chapter; Journal of Communication in Healthcare; Manhattan Research; Mobile Marketing & Media; New York American Marketing Association; New York University; Pharma Marketing News; Pixels and Pills; Public Relations Society of America - New York Chapter; Sales Lead Management Association; Society for Healthcare Strategy and Market Development

For event related questions and registration, please contact Maria Feola-Magro at mfeola@bdionline.com or 212.765.8043.
For sponsorship/speaking opportunities, including pricing, please click here or contact Jennifer Brous at jbrous@bdionline.com or 212-765-8358

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $175.

 

About BDI:
Business Development Institute (BDI), founded in New York City by Steve Etzler in 2001 and managed by Maria Feola, produces conferences and educational programs for marketing, communications and media professionals. Over 11,000 attendees have participated in our programs. We specialize in how technology and the internet impacts marketing, communications and media. Our programs educate while providing valuable networking opportunities to our attendees. The quality of our speakers, program topics, 1/2 day format, network, and value are what differentiates BDI from its competitors. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/bdionline. For additional information as well as sponsorship information, please download our Media Kit.

 

What we have done lately in the Healthcare industry:

11/10/2011 Healthcare Social Communications Leadership Forum

07/13/2011 Social Communications & Healthcare 2011: Case Studies & Roundtables

06/09/2011 Healthcare & Life Sciences Social Communications Leadership Forum

03/17/2011 Healthcare Social Communications Leadership Forum

01/19/2011 Mobile Healthcare Communications: Case Studies and Roundtables

 

Oops...Novartis Does It Again!

Earlier this week, I suggested in a post that pharma layoffs were beginning to decline whereas biotech layoffs were rising. And wouldn’t you know it, just when big pharma employees thought that their jobs were safe, the Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis today announced that it was laying off 2,000 US employees. According to a post on the Pharmalot blog, 1,630 sales reps and an additional 300 positions will be eliminated at Novartis’ Hanover, NJ US headquarters. Last fall, Novartis eliminated 1,100 jobs in Switzerland, 900 R&D and 1,400 sales reps in The US and another 550 jobs at a manufacturing site in the UK 

While the announced layoffs may be part of a global downsizing effort that began last year, many analysts believe Novartis decided to reorganize because its new hypertension drug, Tekturna, performed poorly in clinical trials (increased incidence of non-fatal stroke, renal complications, hyperkalemia and hypotension) to garner approval of the drug to treat patients with Type II diabetes who are a greater risk of cardiovascular and renal events. The company’s best-selling hypertension medicine Diovan lost patent protection in Europe earlier this year and it due to expire in the US next September.

Company executives were betting on Tekturna to replace hypertension sales lost to generic competition for Diovan. Tekturna, approved in Europe as Rasilez, generated sales of $449 million during the first nine months of the past fiscal year but the poor clinical trials results suggest that it may be difficult for the drug to generate the $1.4 billion in annual sales (by 2016) forecasted by many financial analysts.

Stay tuned for more big pharma layoff updates!

Until next time...

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

 

Are There Career Opportunities in Stem Cell Research?

Stem Cell research was hot in the early 2000s. Sadly, 8 years of George Bush effectively eliminated America's competitive edge in the field, primarily in embryonic stem cell research.  Consequently, it is no surprise that there is little emphasis or discussion about stem cell research in the US.  To that end, a recent Gallup Poll was conducted to determine American attitudes and perceptions of stem cell research.  The results of the poll (originally posted the the Assay Depot blog) are shown below.

The poll results suggest that over 50% of Americans surveyed believe that all forms of stem cell research are morally acceptable.  Interestingly, while increasing number of American believe that stem cell research should progress, government funding for it has markedly declined since 2009 even though the ban on embryonic stem cell research was removed.

The take home message is that Bush's 8 year band on embryonic stem cell research has seriously affected American competitiveness in the field and that it is no longer a priority of the US government.  The bottom line: I would not plan a career in stem cell research unless you are willing to relocate outside of the US.

Until next time....

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

 

Pharma Layoffs Decline As Biotech Layoffs Rise

This past holiday season, as usual, was rife with massive layoffs and downsizing at various big pharma companies. Interestingly, in 2011, most biotechnology companies were able to weather the economic downturn and layoffs were not typical. Sadly, 2012 looks to be a more challenging year for many biotechnology company employees.

In the past week or so, several relatively high profile public biotechnology companies announced layoffs. First, on January 5, XOMA, the long- struggling California-based biotechnology company issued a press release indicating its intention to reorganize to focus it financial resources on its lead product gevokizumab and the company’s unique antibody discovery and development capabilities. The reorganization will result in elimination of 84 positions (34% of its workforce) with 50 jobs being lost immediately and the remainder by the end of the first quarter of this year. The layoffs will save the company $14 million. The same day, Winnipeg-based Cangene Corp, one of Canada’s oldest and largest biotechnology company announced that it would eliminate 120 jobs or 17% of its current workforce.  Finally, today, Human Genome Sciences (HGS) announced at the annual JP Morgan conference in San Francisco announced plans to eliminate 150 jobs across multiple departments.

The HGS announcement was somewhat surprising because the company recently received approval for a pioneering systemic lupus erythematous drug called Benlysta. Apparently, poor Benlysta sales have battered the company’s stock price which resulted in the announced layoffs. HGS reported Benlysta sales of a slightly more than $25 million in the fourth quarter which were must less than analysts had originally predicted.

Although these layoffs may be troubling to some, it is important to note that each of  the three companies have been in existence for 20 years or more and are transitioning from research organizations into companies that are finally commercializing their products. Like it or not, companies with commercial products are held to higher standards and receive much greater scrutiny than start ups and early stage companies. That said, while there may be additional layoffs at some older more established biotechnology companies, it may be a good time to start a company. Word on the street suggests that there is a lot of investment capital out there for new start ups!

Until next time...

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

 

Mirror, Mirror On the Wall: Which Recent College Graduates Have the Highest Unemployment Rates of All?

It is no secret that recent college graduates are having a tough time finding work. However, not all college majors are created equal and the unemployment rates among different disciplines are likely to vary. To answer this question, a group of researchers at the Georgetown Center on Education and Workforce analyzed employment data for recent college graduates from an in-depth US census study entitled the American Community Survey conducted in 2009 and 2010. In the study, recent college grades were defined as workers (with college degrees of course) between ages 22 and 26.

The results of the study are shown in the graph below.

The data clearly show that among recent college grads, those who studied architecture have the highest unemployment rate at 13.9%. This finding was not that surprisingly given that the collapse of the housing and construction markets were mainly responsible for the ongoing recession that began in 2007. 

Unemployment rates were lowest among college graduates with training in education and healthcare. Again, these results are not that start. Again, these results were not startling because the US population continues to age (healthcare-related jobs) and the number of school-aged children skyrocketed in the past 20 years (education jobs).

Interestingly, the unemployment rate among engineering graduate, 7.4% is relatively high despite the fact that HR and employment experts contend that there is a shortage of engineers in the US.

Finally, unemployment rates among graduates with art degrees and those who possess degrees in the humanities and liberal art are still very high at 11.1% and 9.4% respectively. That said, maybe getting that MS or PhD degree in the life sciences was not such a bad idea after all!

Until next time...

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

 

Mobile Healthcare Communications Conference for 2012

Increasingly, healthcare professionals, patients and consumers are turning to and using their mobile devices for healthcare information. Further, development of mobile software platforms and associated are allowing patients to more regularly directly communicate with their physicians. To help sort out the growing complexity of the mobile healthcare communications industry, the Business Development Institute (BDI) entitled “Mobile Healthcare Communications 2012:Case Studies and Roundtables” will be held on Thursday, January 26, 2012 from 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM at The Graduate Center of the City University of NY (365 5th Ave, NY, NY 10016).

Registration fee for the event is $195 per attendee. BioJobBlog readers who wish to attend should use promo code BC for a discounted rate of $175.

Speakers and roundtable moderators include:

  1. Lance Hill, CEO, Within3
  2. Scott Hopkins, Executive Vice President, Anderson Direct Marketing
  3. Dr. Katherine Malbon, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Adolescent Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital
  4. Talya Miron-Shatz, PhD, Marketing Department, Wharton, University of Pennsylvania 
  5. Jenna Mons, Consumer Product Manager for LAP-BAND®, Allergan 
  6. John Vieira, Daiichi-Sankyo

Event sponsors include:

BioCrowd, PR NewswireWithin3 ; Anderson Direct MarketingCinchcastJournal of Communication in HealthcareManhattan ResearchNew York UniversitySociety for Healthcare Strategy and Market DevelopmentPixels & Pills

For event related questions and registration, please contact Maria Feola-Magro at mfeola@bdionline.com or 212.765.8043.

For sponsorship/speaking opportunities, including pricing, please click here or contact Jennifer Brous at jbrous@bdionline.com or 212-765-8358.

For additional information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website.

See you at the conference!

Until next time....

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

Preparing For and Coping With Annual Performance Reviews

For many corporate employees, the annual performance review process is a bane to their existence. For those of you who may not be familiar with annual reviews, most corporate employees are required to undergo a review process that includes a synopsis of their accomplishments over the past year and new goals for the upcoming one. And, as all corporate employees understand, the quality of an annual review determines the size of the bonus that they can expect to receive and whether or not a salary increase is in order for the upcoming fiscal year. In other words, you never want to get a “less than stellar” annual review because your fiscal well-being depends on it!

Not surprisingly, preparing for the annual review can be nerve-racking and dealing with the results of the review can be equally challenge (especially if the review is a negative one). Although, most of the annual reviews for 2011 have been completed, Eilene Zimmerman who writes the Career Couch for the New Times posted a helpful article that deals with preparing for the dreaded annual review and how best to respond to either a positive or negative one.

I can tell you from personal experience, the annual review is probably one of the silliest and most inane things that was ever invented for corporate employees. That said, it is part and parcel of the corporate workplace game and to excel you need to get good at!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

Boehringer Ingelheim Announces Plans to Bolster Its Manufacturing Capability in China

The German pharmaceutical company Boehringer Ingelheim (BI) today announced that it plans on investing 70 million Euros to expand its manufacturing facility in the Zhangijiang High-Tech Park in Shanghai China. The expansion will continue through 2013 and the number of employees will increase from 240 to 400 at the new facility

BI was one of the first pharmaceutical companies to enter China in 1994 and the planned expansion was proposed to solidify the company’s position in the emerging Chinese market. The expansion will be modular and based on lean manufacturing practices to provide world class manufacturing capability at the site.   The company already sells certain therapeutic products in China including respiratory, cardiovascular, and CNS. Expansion of the existing manufacturing facility is intended to allow BI to expand into other therapeutic areas that include diabetes, oncology and stroke prevention.

Late last week Merck announced plans to build a new R&D facility in Beijing. Other companies have also announced plans to increase their presence in the Chinese market. I think it may be the time for American student to begin to consider Mandarin as their foreign language in primary and second school education programs.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

The Impact of Pharma Downsizing on Manufacturing Plant Closures

The Pharmalot blog today reported that pharma and biotech downsizing, restructuring and outsourcing have resulted in 38 manufacturing facilities in 2011. While this may not sound like a lot given the ongoing tough economy, the post reports that 65 facilities were closed in 2010. According to some estimates, these closures have resulted in the loss of roughly 18,000 life sciences manufacturing jobs in the past two years. Sadly, pharmaceutical manufacturing, like almost all other manufacturing jobs in the US are being lost at an unprecedented rate. Further, many of these manufacturing jobs are being outsourced to multinational CMOs or to manufacturing facilities being built by pharma companies in emerging markets like Latin America, Eastern Europe and Asia.

Not surprisingly, most of the 2011 closures were in the Northeast (8) resulting in the loss of roughly 1,400 jobs. And, not surprisingly again, one of the hardest hit states was New Jersey; home to almost all of the major pharmaceutical companies in the world. The next region that was hit hard is the Mid-Atlantic (7) with notable closures in Maryland (Shire Pharmaceuticals) and North Carolina (DSM Pharmaceutical Products).

Interestingly, while plant closures are on the rise, there is new manufacturing facility construction that may help to offset the losses. However, unlike the past, many of the new facilities are being financed by academic institutions and not-for-profits rather than life sciences companies. According to the post, roughly 106 new North American (not only the US) are underway and represent an investment value of $4.3 billion. The new Shire facility being constructed in Lexington, MA and the International Vaccine Center (InterVac) in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan were cited as examples.

Despite the constructions of several new manufacturing facilities in North America, it is obvious that most major life sciences companies are looking South and East for future pharmaceutical and biomanufacturing capabilities. The bottom line is that labor and the cost of goods are cheaper in these markets and in contrast with the past, there are skilled workforces in place to manufacture life sciences products according to American, European and Japanese Current Good Manufacturing Practices. 

Until next time...

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

 

Tips on How To Cope After Being Layed Off

Getting layed off is not uncommon in today's economy.  Nevertheless, it is a difficult experience even for the most season employees.  I found a video on YouTube that provides some ideas on how to manage being layed off and what you can do to get back up on your feet. 

Until next time...

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

Improving Employment Opportunities for Life Sciences Graduates

There are a variety of reasons why the life sciences job market has been so dismal in recent years. First and foremost, there are too many applicants for too few jobs; employers are ignoring resumes/CVs that previously commanded face-to-face interviews. Second and perhaps more pernicious, is the notion among corporate executives and hiring managers that current graduates (both undergraduate and graduate students) have been catered to and are so academically untested that they bring little or no value to today’s fast-paced and demanding workplaces. While this characterization may or may not be warranted, it is a prevailing attitude that is likely hindering employment opportunities for recent life sciences graduates.

According to an insightful article written by Robert W. Goldfarb, a management consultant, entitled “Help Graduates Find Their Footing” in the past, senior hiring managers were willing to hire applicants that thought outside of the box or were a bit unconventional to bring in new ideas and create some chaos in quiet office environments. But Goldfarb asserts, that long, painful and largely unsuccessful job searches “have sapped their daring, creativity and willingness to challenge old procedures.” Further he believes that older employees, once extremely resistant to change, are much more willing to reinvent themselves by adapting to a technically-challenging workplace and bringing mature problem solving skills to the job to protect their jobs and 401K plans. Because of this, Goldfarb contends that “managers have become far less tolerant of the missteps that once expected of any new hires” and not surprisingly older workers make mistakes. Finally, previously supportive hiring managers, criticize recent graduates for poor quality written and oral reports and the inability to recognize trends or draw conclusions from masses of data. 

So what can be done to ensure that the current generation of college graduates does not remain unemployed into perpetuity? Goldfarb suggests that mentoring and building partnerships between recent college graduates and companies that want to hire them would be an important first step toward fixing the problem. He suggests that companies should consider investing in training programs designed to shape the employees that they ultimately will need for their businesses. For example, Goldfarb suggests that:

 “high potential graduates for whom there isn’t an immediate opening could be hired, not as unpaid interns but as salaried trainees given three to six months to prove their value in a series of assignments. Those who don’t seize the opportunity can quickly be dismissed.

Also, he suggests that trainees must be mentored to help them avoid the “small missteps that can damage a career before it starts.” Interesting, back in the 70s and 80s most major corporation had training programs in place. These were largely abandoned in the 90s as a result of global competition and increasing US labor costs.

Goldfarb’s plan requires companies to think strategically, and plan for their employment needs of the future. Sadly, as many of you already know, must companies focus on the short term and are not mindful of future needs; after all they are someone else’s problems to solve). But, in response to this attitude, Goldfarb offers this dire warning:

“Employers can keep faulting overindulgent parents, ineffectual teachers, colleges without required subjects and graduates unsuited to today’s complex workplace or they can play a greater role in training and developing a generation longing to take its place in the American mainstream.”

Until next time...

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

 

Astra Zeneca Will Layoff 1,150 Sales Reps

Last week, US unemployment dipped to 8.6%, it lowest level since 2008. Stock markets rose and everyone was buoyed by a possible economic recovery. What a difference one week can make. Today, Astra Zeneca announced that it will layoff 1,150 sales reps; a few short weeks after announcing plans to eliminate 400 jobs at is US headquarters in Wilmington, DE. The company currently employs about 61,000 workers worldwide, including 14, 000 in North America.

According to the president of Astra Zeneca US, today’s announcement is part of the larger layoff of 10, 400 employees announced back in 2010. These layoffs are largely the result of loss of patent protection for several of Astra Zeneca’s largest selling drugs including Crestor (cholesterol), Nexium (acid reflux) and Sereoquel (anti-pyschotic).  Today’s announcement brings the total of US pharmaceutical employees who lost their jobs this year to about 20,000 according to a post on the Pharmalot blog.

Tis the season, after all!

Until next time...

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

 

Looking for a Chemistry Job? This Webinar May Help

I received a heads-up from the American Chemical Society’s (ACS) Sergio Lewis about a free webinar entitled “How to Secure and Nurture a Vibrant Chemistry Career in the 21st Century.” The webinar is scheduled for December 1, 2011 from 2:00-3:00 PM and will be led by Brian Fahie, PhD from Eli Lilly & Co. The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session.

For more information you can download the program here. To register follow this link.

Until next time...

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

 

Tis the Season: How to Ask for a Raise Without Getting Fired!

While many of you are happy just because you have a job, there are those individuals (deserving or not) who are going to “bite the bullet” and ask for a raise. This makes sense because over the past few years the cost of health insurance has gone up along with college tuition, gasoline price and a variety of other things while salaries have all but stagnated. Interestingly, only 9 percent of companies have put pay freezes in place over the past 18 months; a rate this is consistent with historical standards. That is down from the nearly two-thirds of companies that imposed pay freezes in January 2010. In other words, now may be a good time to ask for a raise as companies are trying to retain high value employees who presumably were too vital to lay off when companies were downsizing over the past three years. Sadly, merit raises (when they are meted out) have precipitously dropped in recent years from an average of roughly 4-5 percent to a paltry 2 percent on average today.

Whether or not economic times are good or bad, it is hard for most employees to “ask for a raise.” This is because it is difficult for employees to determine if they are ‘worthy” of a raise. To that end, there was a fantastic article in the NY Times business section last week helps employees determine whether or not they are deserving of a raise and it also provides a road map to actually prepare and ultimately ask for a raise.

It is a great read and provides great insights and ideas for those willing to risk asking their bosses for raises in difficult economic times.

Until next time...

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

 

A Commentary: Pharma's Ongoing PR Problem

Not a day goes by without some report about pharma’s ongoing problems with illegal drug promotions, class action suits against blockbuster medications or civil or criminal settlements with state and federal governments. A quick perusal of articles posted to the Pharmalot Blog in November alone revealed no fewer than eight big pharma companies including Lilly, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Pfizer, Novartis and Amgen that were involved in some sort of legal action regarding inappropriate marketing claims or failure to disclose potential side effects of blockbuster drugs. To make matters worse, a larger than usual number of pharma companies have experienced manufacturing problems that have resulted in drug recalls or shortages. This list includes companies such as Genzyme, Baxter, Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline and most recently Boehringer Ingelheim. While chronic legal and manufacturing problems are extremely troubling (some assert it is just the cost of doing “business”), I believe that the amount of money spent lobbying Congress for legislation favorable to the industry is even more egregious.

According to a recent post on Knowledge Ecology International, the pharma industry has so far spent $115,571,832 on lobbying in 2011 (this number is sure to go higher by the end of this fiscal year). Interestingly, the biggest year for pharmaceutical industry lobbying was in 2009—a year after the Affordable Health Care Bill was passed—with totals in excess of $186,000,000. Just think about how many jobs could have been saved if companies reinvested the money into R&D rather than greasing the palms of lobbyists to induce Congress to pass laws to continue to get favorable tax rates, improve ROI and bolster the stock prices of those companies! To wit, Newt Gingrich, a Republican Presidential candidate and Former Speaker of the House has been accused of lobbying former congressional colleagues to vote for a Medicare drug subsidy while he was a paid consultant to AstraZeneca. Gingrich vehemently denies these allegations; probably because he realizes that most Americans don’t like big pharma and may vote against him if the claims are proven to be true and he wins the Republican presidential nomination.

Not withstanding the legal issues and unnecessary lobbying, what is really hurting the pharmaceutical industry is its lack of communication and transparency with patients and its unfailing practice of putting profits before healthcare. While every big pharma company I know always talks about fulfilling unmet medical needs, meeting those needs always comes at great costs (literally) to patients. Sadly, many patients can no longer afford the costs of potentially lifesaving medicines and treatments. Unless pharma begins to change the way it presents itself to the American public, it will continue to suffer the lost of confidence and trust of the American people. And, if the industry is unable to regain the public’s trust, its inability  will ultimately result in legislation that allows the US government to control drug prices: something that exists in most other countries in the world and big pharma has been desperately trying to prevent for the past 50 years!

Until next time...

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

 

Despite Near-Record Recalls, the Price of Prescription Drugs Continues to Rise

Ed Silverman, the intrepid author of the Pharmalot Blog, reported today that the average price of prescription drugs through last month rose 7.2 per cent; which tops the annual price rate increases over the past decade. The cost analysis was done on 130 prescription drugs.

The biggest winners were: Suboxone, marketed by Reckitt Benckiser to treat opioid addiction which rose 21 percent. Cephalon raised the price of its Provigil narcolepsy pill by 15 percent and Sunovion Pharma hiked the prices of its Xopenex asthma and COPD med by 9.8 percent. Other drugmakers on the list included Genentech, Merck and Abbott Laboratories.

Ed cautioned that “the price changes are based on WAC, or wholesale acquisition cost, for more than 90 percent of the drugs, which means that less than 10 percent of increases are based on direct price or suggested wholesale price” Nevertheless, any wholesale price increases are always passed on to the end users aka patients!

It is troubling that in these tough economic times that drug prices continue to rise at unprecedented rates. And access to reasonably priced medicines continues to diminish.  Not surprisingly, prices continue to rise in advance of healthcare reform legislation that doesn’t kick in entirely until 2014.

Until next time

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

 

Social Media and Pharma Update: "No Need to Fear Adverse Event Reporting!"

About two years, I posted an opinion piece on BioJobBlog which argued that pharma’s reluctance to engage in social media because of fears of being swamped with adverse events (AEs) reports was little more than a red herring.

In that piece I opined “what is really at stake, is the systemic changes that would be required to transform a historically, opaque and unresponsive industry into a transparent, accountable and responsive one that would be required if it embraces social media as an integral part of its business model.” Nevertheless, two years later, there is still no FDA guidance on the use of social media in the pharmaceutical industry and while some companies have warmed up to the concept, it has not been wholly embraced by most companies.

However, there is new data that may put the “fear of being swamped by AEs reporting” argument to rest. The Pharmalot Blog reported today that a new study conducted by Visible Technologies, a social media monitoring and software firm, showed that only 0.3 percent of more than 257,000 posts about 224 different products —33 antacid over-the-counter meds, 38 over-the-counter decongestants, 10 prescription statins and 143 prescription drugs used to treat high blood pressure—mentioned an AE. For a more detailed analysis of the study please click here.

According to the Pharmalot post the study was conducted over a recent 30-day period and posts were collected from millions of social media sources including “blogs; forums; message boards; message groups; social networks, notably Facebook and LinkedIn; Twitter; regular news sites; specialized health sites, such a WebMD; and video and photo sites, such as YouTube and Flickr.” The study’s focus on statins, blood pressure medications, over-the-counter decongestants and antacids was intentional because tens of millions of persons use these products and therefore, would be more likely to comment on them at social media sites. The bottom line: the use of social media by pharma companies will not overwhelm their existing AE reporting networks nor will it require that more persons be hired. In fact, as I argued in my previous post, using social media for AE report may actually help companies better managed approved and marketed drugs as part of their FDA-required post marketing drug surveillance programs. 

At this point, I am at a loss as to why pharma has not yet embraced social media and leveraged it to their advantage like other industries. I suspect that most companies will not act until FDA issues the social media guidance it has been promising for the past two years. Sadly, it is anyone’s guess when the agency will finally issue the guidance—it has already been delayed several times over the past two years!

Until next time...

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

 

Some Good News: Allergan Will Open A R&D Facility in New Jersey

The New Jersey Governors Office announced today that the healthcare company Allergan, Inc, known mainly for its eye care products, plans on opening an R&D facility in NJ that will inject $12 million in private investment into the state’s beleaguered economy and add several hundred jobs over the next three to five years. Allergan currently employs about 10,000 people worldwide. Allergan chose New Jersey after it received a $17 million grant from the state to build the facility.  At present its size and location is yet to be determined.

While New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (possibly a vice president candidate) is taking as much credit as possible for Allergan’s decision to open an R&D facility and create jobs, it may be too little to late for New Jersey—home to most of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies—which has lost tens of thousands of life sciences jobs because of mergers, reorganizations and layoffs.

Nice try Chris but you will have to do better than several hundred new jobs before you can claim that you are solely responsible for New Jersey’s economic recovery. I hope he is selected as a Vice Presidential candidate; then New Jersey will have a chance to right itself after the damage that Christie caused in his first two years as governor.

Until next time...

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

 

In Case You Were Wondering: FDA Approved 35 New Prescription Medicines This Year

Last week, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a press release lauding its approval of 35 new prescription medications in FY2001. According to the release 2011 was a banner year for drug approvals; being only surpassed in FY2009 when 37 new medicines garnered regulatory approval.

FDA detailed its accomplishments in a report entitled “FY2011, Innovative Drug Approvals” which touted faster approval times in the United States as compared with the FDA’s counterparts around the globe. Twenty-four of the 35 approvals occurred in the United States before any other country in the world and also before the European Union, continuing a trend of the United States leading the world in first approval of new medicines. 

Among this year’s highlights:

  1. Two of the drugs – one for melanoma and one for lung cancer – are breakthroughs in personalized medicine. Each was approved with a diagnostic test that helps identify patients for whom the drug is most likely to bring benefits;
  2. Seven of the new medicines provide major advances in cancer treatment;
  3. Almost half of the drugs were judged to be significant therapeutic advances over existing therapies for heart attack, stroke and kidney transplant rejection;
  4. Ten are for rare or “orphan” diseases, which frequently lack any therapy because of the small number of patients with the condition, such as a treatment for hereditary angioedema;
  5. Almost half (16) were approved under “priority review,” in which the FDA has a six month goal to complete its review for safety and effectiveness;
  6. Two-thirds of the new approvals were completed in a single review cycle, meaning sufficient evidence was provided by the manufacturer so that the FDA could move the application through the review process without requesting major new information;
  7. Three were approved using “accelerated approval,” a program under which the FDA approves safe and effective medically important new drugs quickly, and relies on subsequent post-market studies to confirm clinical benefit. For example, Corifact, the first treatment approved for a rare blood clotting disorder, was approved under this program
  8. Thirty-four of 35 were approved on or before the review time targets agreed to with industry under The Prescription Drug User Fee Act  (PDUFA), including three cancer drugs that FDA approved in less than six months.

PDUFA was established by Congress in 1992 to ensure that the FDA had the necessary resources for the safe and timely review of new drugs and for increased drug safety efforts. The current legislative authority for PDUFA expires on Sept. 30, 2012. 

Maybe the agency can keep its streak alive before  PDUFA expires next year!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Statistics and Job-Related Facts You Should Know About Careers in the Life Sciences

Fewer and fewer American college students are choosing to major in Science Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM). This has been an ongoing trend in the US for the past two decades. However, within the STEM majors, the life sciences are faring the best. While I believe that the US needs more life sciences majors to remain competitive with the rest of the world, there are a few things you ought to know before you take the life sciences plunge.

  1. More than 86,000 American biology majors graduate each year
  2. About 58% of all bachelors’, masters and doctorates in the life sciences are awarded to women (who continue to earn substantially less than their male counterparts)
  3. Entry level salaries for biology majors range from $40,000 to $50,000 per year (computer and engineering students start at salaries of $55,000 to $65,000 per year)
  4. PhD degrees in the life sciences take on average six years to complete
  5. Postdoc starting salaries range from $37,000 to $40,000 per year
  6. More than a third of biologists are still working as postdocs or in other non-tenure track jobs six years after receiving their PhD degrees
  7. Only 14% of PhD-trained biologists win tenure track positions within six years of receiving their degrees
  8. Because of tighter funding for government jobs and the loss of 300,000 pharmaceutical jobs in the past decade, many newly-minted PhDs are forced to become serial postdocs (supported by soft money) or help senior scientists set up and run their laboratories waiting to see if they can win permanent academic employment
  9. Fewer tenured life sciences professors are retiring because of the financial downturn

If you still want to be biology major after reading this post, then I think that you know what career path you ought to pursue! Just sayin’......

Until next time...

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

 

Want Up-to-Date Pharma News Coverage? Check Out These Blogs

Over the past five years or so there has been a proliferation of blogs that cover the life sciences industry. While I visit some of them frequently, e.g., Pharmalot, EyeonFDA and PharmaLive,.

I am sure that there are others out there that may be useful. To that end, I came across a blog post on the Health and Life website that listed the top 10 essential pharma news blogs. 

#1 Pharmalot

How can we describe the value Pharmalot provides?

Visiting Pharmalot is something we do daily – we can give no blog or resource a higher compliment.  Ed Silverman has the experience to cut through the news and provide readers with the most important tidbits along with pertinent thoughts.

And for those interested in Pharma, the daily email can be quite valuable.

#2 PharmaGossip

Pharmagossip is recognized for horribly accurate, sharp and incisive analysis.  You can feel the author’s passion and concern for upholding ethical standards in almost any post.

Just don’t read before going to sleep or before discussions on whether man is inherently good or bad.

Pharmagossip is a blog that can change how you think about things while keeping up with important pharma news.

#3 In the Pipeline

What’s wrong with dioxygen difluoride and how accurate are HER2 receptor tests?

Derek Lowe does an excellent job of analyzing drugs, especially those that are in the pipeline and being developed.  He’s the kind of guy who points out flaws in a medication a month before clinical trials reveal it’s a dud.

You can wait for the news to be public knowledge.  Or you can read his blog.

#4 The IN VIVO Blog

When the FDA asks ten nephrologists to review a medication and they all decline, the In Vivo Blog catches it.  This blog is well known for accuracy, quality and overall being an extremely useful read for those trying to keep up with the fast-moving pharmaceutical industry.

Best of all, they have a good sense of humor.

#5 Pharma Marketing Blog

Pharma Marketing blog gives you the expert analysis of John Mack, a man who knows a lot about the marketing tactics Pharma companies use – and constantly learns new things and shares his insight with readers.

Is Pfizer running a bait and switch with its Facebook fan page?  Is Allegran running an inappropriate advertising campaign for Botox?

Find out about these and other issues in marketing related to pharmaceuticals by reading what John Mack has to say.

#6 Drug Discovery Opinion

For people who care about pharmaceuticals, the Drug Discovery Opinion is gold waiting to be discovered.

This blog provides analysis of the technical issues that have tremendous implications for drug discovery, efficacy and marketability.  It explains the fundamental science that drives pharmacology.

Its authors have almost unmatchable credentials. Great read and quite useful.

#7 Pharma Strategy Blog

Which Tyrosine Kinase inhibitor shows the most promise?  What’s going on with Avastin and ovarian cancer?

To get the answer to these, and other important questions, Pharma Strategy Blog is excellently informative.  To get a sense of the value of its posts consider this.

Sally Church, the blog’s author, was responsible for helping launch Gleevec. 

Her expertise and talent shows clearly in her posts.  Pharma Strategy blog is top notch and it gives readers insider knowledge.

#8 The MacGuffin

Not a blog for the light of heart, The MacGuffin is infamous for no-holds barred criticism and analysis.

They see things other people don’t.  And they deliver their thoughts in a combination of colloquial and scientific talk. They might deliver a knock-out analysis of a medication and follow up with an inappropriate photo of a celebrity.

Cocky and clever.  Make sure to check out their analysis of schizophrenia.

#9 Pharma Conduct

This blog keeps an eye on the conduct of pharmaceuticals and the healthcare business.  It is mainly written by Eric Milgram, Ph.D. who has more than 10 years of pharmaceutical experience.

It is an investigative blog that is unafraid to expose corruption.  The formal, analytical training Eric underwent to learn chemical analysis shows through in the high caliber of his posts.

#10 The Science Business

Well written, useful and insightful.  Not as willing to take risks and focus on emerging issues as some others on this list, this blog makes the list because it provides extremely high quality writing on health care issues.

Sadly, BioJobBlog did not make the list. I guess I just have to work a little harder.

Until next time...

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

 

Sanofi Aventis Announces New Layoffs

Despite a lull in layoffs over the past summer, this fall is shaping up to another bad one for pharmaceutical employees. Late last week Novartis announced that it was laying off about 2,000 employees. Prior to the Novartis announcement, Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Merck have all disclosed plans to eliminate thousands of jobs on a worldwide basis.  To add insult to injury, Sanofi Aventis told its employees today that the company would be shifting operations from New Jersey to Massachusetts and that hundred of employees would be losing their jobs. While a Sanofi spokesperson refused to specify the exact number of employees who may lose their jobs, estimates are in the hundreds, mainly in R&D and sales in the oncology and cardiovascular areas.

The announcement was not unexpected because several weeks ago the company announced that it would cut another $2.9 billion in costs to offset pending generic encroachment on its top selling medications Plavix and Avapro. Further, consolidation of Sanofi’s R&D operations and its early development work to the Boston area is mainly a result of its acquisition of Genzyme earlier this year. To that end, later-stage development work will remain at Sanofi’s headquarters in Bridgewater, NJ while pharmaceutical R&D, Sanofi Pasteur biologics and global oncology has already been moved to Massachusetts. At present, Sanofi employs about 3,000 people in New Jersey and 5,000 in Massachusetts (including Genzyme employees).

Interestingly, while job cuts are taking place in western markets, hiring is brisk in emerging like China and India. For example, several months ago Pfizer announced that it was closing down its antibiotic discovery program in the US and moving it to China. Likewise, Novartis plans on sending some medicinal chemistry and regulatory work overseas to India. If the downsizing and outsourcing trends continue at their current pace, it will become increasingly difficult for most Americans to find pharmaceutical R&D jobs in the US. Can anybody still wonder why we may be losing ground to countries like India and China?

Until next time...

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

 

An Update on Pharma Blogs

Blogs first began appearing on the web about 10 years ago and most experts agree that they ignited the social media revolution. While blogs are the oldest form of social media, many pharma companies are reluctant to contribute to the content of the blogosphere. This is mainly because of perceived regulatory and legal issue and consequences. Nevertheless, a few intrepid big pharma companies have taken the social media plunge and currently maintain blogs with various formats and content.

From time to time, Mark Senak, author of the outstanding EyeonFDA blog, likes to check up on pharma to see how their social media experiments are going. In a post today, entitled “A Profile on Blogging By Pharma and FDA” he provides an update on pharma bloggers who he thinks are making a contribution to the life sciences community. The following is Mark’s assessment:

Johnson & Johnson–With JNJBTW, J&J has been blogging longer than any other pharma company with an archive going back to June 2007.  JNJBTW provides works to forge relationships with a broad spectrum of healthcare consumers by providing insights and resources for a variety of treatment related issues and profiles of company activities.  The blog haws multiple authors and accepts comments, though reviews them before posting according to the comments policy.  The blog has its own domain.

GSK–The More Than Medicine blog goes back to January 2009 and uses multiple authors to cover a wide span of subject matter that includes corporate social responsibility topics, chronic diseases, and current events. According to its comments policy, the blog allows for moderated comments. Entries can vary in terms of timing; with all three entries for October appearing on the same day.

AstraZeneca–Like JNJBTW and More Than Medicine, the AZHealthConnections blog takes a generalist approach by providing information on a broad spectrum of subject matter – some disease or condition specific in the areas of cancer and diabetes – but also including a public policy and general healthcare information. Residing in its own domain, the earliest archive is in October 2009 and the blog permits moderated comments according to its comments policy.

Lilly–The blog LillyPad is a more recent entry to the blogosphere begin in third quarter 2010, though no archive link is available on the landing page. LillyPad was started with a twitter handle as well of the same name, and more recently joined by a LillyPad YouTube channel called the Lilly Health Channel. The posting on the blog have frequent postings related to public policy and advocacy issues, though there is sometimes a posting on social responsibility or what it is like to work at the company. However, the focus on advocacy and policy issues (supporting innovation) seems to drive this effort in a very specific direction – being less generalist than other approaches. The comments policy is at the end of a post and states that comments are filtered – or moderated – by the company before posting.

Sanofi US–Here a company has taken a much more specific approach with a blog called Discuss Diabetes. The archive goes back to January 2011 and is therefore the newest entry and has the distinction on being the only disease/condition-specific target audience.  The blog, with its own domain, accepts and moderates comments. The focus is to provide information and resources regarding diabetes and resources for those who have it or are care partners, including such assets as its own mobile app for diabetics – Go Meals.

Pfizer–The Think Science Now blog on the Pfizer site has multiple authors who write to translate the science of medical research, though it lacks some of the traditional characteristics of a blog, such as an archive or commentary policy that was readily apparent. However, it is exemplary of the effort to aim at a specific audience of people rather than go broadly to the consuming public.

FDA–The FDA Transparency Blog first posted in November 2008 and was originally set to run for six months.  The purpose is to provide insight into how and why the agency comes to some of its decisions.  It does not have its own domain but is contained in the labyrinth of the FDA’s website.  The blog allows for moderated comments according to its comments policy, though I have not found that to necessarily be the case.

As you can see, there are not many pharma companies that maintain corporate blogs. Perhaps this may change after FDA releases it guidance on the use of social media in the life sciences industry. That said, it is anybody’s guess as to when that guidance will be issued; it already has been two years and there is no guidance yet!

Until next time...

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

 

 

Occupy Novartis?

Angry with recent job cuts announced by the Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis, protesters, this past Saturday, gathered in Basel and beside the villa of its former CEO and Chairman Daniel Vasella to express their displeasure with the company’s decision to layoff workers.

In Basel, about 1,000 people gathered and demanded that Novartis reverse its decision to layoff 1,100 people who work at the company. Meanwhile, about 20 protestors gathered in a field opposite Vasella’s walled lakeside Mansion. Two of the protestors handed Vasella a “fake pink slip” and according to witnesses he laughed and took the gesture in stride.

Vasella, who is not a stranger to protests, is one of Switzerland's highest-paid executives and in 2009 animal rights activists set fire to his Tirolean hunting lodge to protest Novartis’ use of animals to test pharmaceuticals and consumer products. 

Currently, the Occupy Wall Street movement in the US has primarily targeted banks and financial institutions. However, two weeks ago, a group of protestors in Croton, CT, staged a demonstration at Pfizer headquarters to express their anger a recent layoffs announced by the company.

Until next time...

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

 

Some Practical Twitter Advice for Jobseekers

I just returned from the AAPS meeting in Washington, DC and I was very surprised to learn that many graduate students and postdocs have heard of Twitter but don’t know exactly what it is or how to use it! Because of this, I decided to write a post that offered a step-by-step approach for using Twitter as a job search tool for life scientists who may be looking for jobs. However, much to my delight, I found a recent post on the Secret of the Job Hunt website that provides a great “how to” guide on Twitter use for jobseekers. 

The post entitled How to Use Twitter to Find a Job” was written by Erin Kennedy, CPRW, CERW a certified career counselor, resume writer and blogger is a great introduction to using Twitter and she provides insightful tips on how to maximize Twitter’s potential as a job searching tool.

How to Use Twitter to Find a Job

by Erin Kennedy, CPRW, CERW 

For any newbies to social networking, it might seem unusual to use a site such as Twitter to find a job. However, many people can find the right contacts on Twitter to help them to find a job–but it can be a little complicated in 140 characters or less? When using Twitter as a job search tool, it is best to keep content as neutral and professional as possible. Remember, as with anything you write and post online, once you “tweet” it’s out there FOREVER.

The first thing to do when starting up a Twitter account is to choose your user name wisely and word your 160-character bio in such a way that it becomes more searchable, or Google-friendly. Your bio should share a little bit about your career so that when other people look up that keyword, you can gain more traffic to your profile. An avatar will also make your profile more appealing. Choose a professional portrait or a simple picture in which you’re facing the camera and you are not accompanied by anyone else.

A basic rule of thumb when it comes to using Twitter as a job-search tool is to keep content favorable to anyone who might stumble across it – your tweets should balance your work and personal life. If you are looking for a job, you can tweet about the types of jobs in which you are interested. Also, you can tweet about your hobbies or interests so that employers get an idea of what you are like outside of work.

In that same vein, keep in mind that there are many recruiters who actually look to Twitter for new hires because it gives them something of a real-world perspective of what that person is like. In an extremely competitive economy, where plenty of people are qualified for the same job, many companies look at an applicant’s personality to see whether they would be a good fit in the company’s culture. In this case, it helps to follow these recruiters for the companies in which you are interested.

On a similar note, you can connect with these recruiters and industry leaders and show them your interest in their tweets. You can either “retweet” to forward their tweets along or you can address them directly by putting the @ symbol before their user name. By keeping in touch with these people, you will have access to the latest information in your industry. Therefore, when you are called in for a job interview, you will have that extra edge over other candidates by speaking confidently about your knowledge of their field.

Like any real-world networking situation, a Twitter presence cannot be expected to build overnight. It takes time and patience; however, by connecting with the right people, you might very well find your way to your dream career. The key to a successful Twitter profile is keeping it professional with a glimpse of your personality, hobbies and interests outside of work as well.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!

 

Emerging Job Opportunities in the Life Sciences Industry

I just returned from the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS) meeting in Washington DC where I gave three talks about biocareer development strategies. One of the talks, "Emerging Job Opportunities in the Life Sciences Industry" was reported on (see below) by a writer from Fierce Pharma.  While I don't usually "too my own horn." about my achievements, I thought a Number 2 ranking in the publications daily top 10 list was certainly worth a mention.  

 
New job opportunities emerging in Big Pharma
October 26, 2011 — 7:24am ET | By Maureen Martino

Since 2001, 300,000 pharma employees have lost their jobs, primarily in R&D and sales. That's according to Clifford Mintz, the founder of BioInsights, which develops and offers bioscience education and training. Mintz spoke at a session on new job opportunities in biotech and pharma at the annual AAPS meeting in Washington, D.C. While the losses have been steep, they're balanced by emerging, in-demand careers in the industry.

The industry's struggles are well-known: Many companies are facing loss of exclusivity on their biggest sellers but have little in the pipeline to pick up the slack. Productivity is dropping as the cost of bringing a new drug to market soars. Government and payors want more effective drugs for less money. The list goes on.

Developers are looking to new markets and new technologies to address these issues. But how do these trends play out for the pharma job seeker? Many people, particularly Ph.D.s, may have to consider getting additional training if they want to land their dream job. "Companies used to be willing to just hire smart people. But with the economic downturn and global competition, companies can no longer afford to invest in people who have promise. They need to see proven skills," Mintz explained. With the right blend of skills and experience, however, there still some pharma jobs that are in demand.

Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs

"Clinical research is the lifeblood of the industry," Mintz said. As developers expand in emerging markets, there's a particular demand for people to manage and organize overseas clinical trials. "There's a huge need for clinical research professionals worldwide," he said, noting that most Phase I and II trials are conducted outside of the U.S.

Another one of the industry's perennial needs is regulatory affairs professionals. "Regulatory affairs experience is a skill that all companies large and small would die to get their hands on," explained Mintz. The increasingly complex and uncertain world of FDA regulation--particularly when it comes to new technology and science--means that companies are always on the prowl for individuals with solid regulatory knowledge and ability to interact with the FDA. You can read more about the demand for clinical research and regulatory affairs jobs here.

Biomanufacturing

The pharma industry's interest in biologics remains strong--just look at Sanofi's buyout of Genzyme, or Roche's purchase of Genentech. They're lured by disease-altering biologics that are less likely to face generic competition than traditional drugs. As a result, there's been increased demand for professionals who can navigate the complex world of biomanufacturing. Those with a background in upstream and downstream processes, large-scale protein purification, fermentation technology and bioengineering can make the transition to biomanufacturing.

Healthcare Information Technology

The rise of bioinformatics and genomics coupled with the push for electronic medical records has created jobs in healthcare information technology. Health informatics--the intersection of healthcare and IT--is ideal for people with expertise in genomics, bioinformatics or software that understand how to work with and manipulate large data sets and databases. The Obama administration has made EHRs a priority, and there's a need for software engineers and biologists who are comfortable working with medical information.

Medical Devices

"The medical devices industry has been experiencing explosive growth for the past decade," Mintz said. Regulatory hurdles in the medical device industry are much lower than they are for biologics or small molecules, making the industry a more stable alternative to biotech and pharma. The demand for devices, which address problems that can't be treated with medicine, will continue to grow as the population ages. Job seekers with strong backgrounds in bioinformatics, genomics, engineering and translational medicine are best suited to this field.

Medical Communications

Medical communications--which includes medical writing, editing, graphic design and science journalism--continues to boom. The demand for these jobs has risen because companies need a slew of communication materials to send to patients, physicians, researchers, investigators and the general public about their products and business.

Patent Law and Technology Transfer

Recent changes to U.S. patent laws have increased the demand for patent agents and patent attorneys in the life sciences field. Pharma's growing reliance on basic research from learning institutions means that there's a need for technology transfer experts. These experts manage the patent estate and intellectual property of universities and colleges that may engage in licensing deals with the industry. A law degree is a must to compete in this field.

Until next time...

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

Optimizing LinkedIn As A Job Search Tool

While LinkedIn is not considered by many to be a “true” social networking site (some consider it to be little more than a place to post an electronic resume), it is increasingly becoming the place to go to look for or find a job. Most recruiters and many hiring managers used LinkedIn to source qualified candidates for job open at their organizations. That said a well-thought-out and carefully written LinkedIn profile can make the difference between employment or not.

To that end, I came across a great article entitled “Five Minutes to Optimize Your LinkedIn Profile”. Its author, Ian Levine, provide some excellent advice and tips about how to craft a LinkedIn profile so that you will be found by recruiters and prospective hiring managers. Not surprisingly, the key to success is peppering your profile with keywords that are contained in standard job ads in your industry. According to Levine, LinkedIn appears to scan only four categories: Professional Headline, Titles, Specialties and Industries. LinkedIn scans these categories for frequency of the keywords selected.

One way that Levine recommends to assess whether or not your profile is a good one is to enter specific keywords that are consistent with the type of job(s) that you are interested in landing. If your profile comes up at the top (or close to it) of these types of searches than your profile is a good one. A failure to appear in the search results suggests that your profile may need some additional work to land a job!

Until next time...

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

 

The Impact of Consolidation on Pharmaceutical R&D

Over the past 10 years or so there has been an enormous amount of consolidation in the life science industry. While this activity has been very good for shareholders, it has had a devastating effort on pharmaceutical R&D says John  LaMattina PhD, a chemist, blogger, author and former President of Pfizer Global R&D.

In his article “The Impact of Merger on Pharmaceutical R&D," LaMattina asserts:

“Mergers and acquisitions of pharmaceutical companies over the past 15 years have had a major consequence on the internal research and development productivity of these organizations. Industry consolidation has eliminated a high degree of competition and resulted in the downsizing of internal research efforts. The execution of these mergers has caused a loss of momentum in the development pipelines of these companies along with loss of scientific talent.”

In addition, he believes that M&A and outsourcing of R&D operations has resulted in the loss of scientific talent required for innovation and development of novel new medicines. “Sadly, this loss of innovation comes at a time when we are trying to find treatments for challenging and difficult-to-treat diseases like Alzheimers and many cancers” says LaMattina.

While most life sciences executives believe that consolidation is good for business, LaMattina, along with John Lechleiter, the outspoken CEO of Eli Lilly& Co (who is also a PhD-trained chemist) believe that continued consolidation in the industry will have devastating consequences. “We are still very much opposed to a large-scale combination. We don’t think size is necessarily supportive of innovation.” says Lechleiter. 

LaMattina added “Downsizing R&D hinders the ability of companies to develop new drugs because they lack the scientific expertise required to make critical decision as a drug candidate makes it way through the pipeline.”

Unfortunately, most current pharmaceutical and life sciences executives don’t think like LaMattina. Since 2001, over 300,000 pharmaceutical employees, mostly R&D scientists and sales representatives have lost their jobs.

Until next time...

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

 

Twitter is the Social Medium of Choice for Big Pharma And Biotech Companies

Despite the initial pushback against social media by many pharma and biotech companies it appears that Twitter is emerging as the medium of choice for the life sciences industry. The main reasons for this trend are the 140 character world limit and the real time nature of Twitter. Unlike Facebook pages and blogs, where visitor’s comments (of any length) remain for indefinite periods of time, the information contained in tweets is minimal and their exposure time is second or minutes rather than days or months. These features allow pharma and biotech companies to more easily manage information flow and quickly implement damage control when necessary. 

Because of the growing importance of Twitter in life sciences circles, Mark Senak, the intrepid author of the EyeonFDA blog and a self-proclaimed social media enthusiast, compiled a list of well, useful pharmaceutical Twitter lists. Twitter users can subscribe to lists which are a compilation of tweets from persons who belong to the lists. For those of you who use LinkedIn, Twitter Lists are analogous to LinkedIn Groups.

Mark recommends the following lists to those who want to follow the pharmaceutical/healthcare industry

Healthcare Reporters 

Pharmaceutical Manufacturers 

Device  Manufacturers

Medical Journals

FDA Twitter Feeds.

Government Healthcare

Pharmaceutical and Biotech Jobs

To view these lists you must be a Twitter member!

Hat tip to Mark and to John Mack at the Pharma Marketing Blog for the Twitter image!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!

 

Amgen Hires Tony Hooper and Lays off Nearly 400 Employees

Last week Amgen announced that it was reorganizing its R&D structure and that layoffs were likely. Today, the company announced that it had hired Tony Hooper, very recently the former senior vice president, Commercial Operations, and president, U.S., Japan and Intercontinental at Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) to overhaul commercial operations. Shortly after the Hooper announcement almost 400 Amgen employees learned that they would lose their jobs.

Hooper will replace Jim Daly as executive vice president of commercial operations at Amgen. During his 16 year tenure at BMS, Hooper ran commercial operations for all of BMS’ products in both mature and emerging markets.

Amgen is reorganizing its R&D efforts because its EPO franchise revenues are declining and it is preparing to launch its recently approved osteoporosis drug called Prolia. According to a post on today’s Pharmalot blog the R&D overhaul is not an across the board reduction but will affect multiple sites. At present, Amgen employs about 17,600 workers worldwide.

Until next time...

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

 

Consolidation Continues in the US Life Sciences Industry

Earlier this week Roche Holding AG announced that it would pay $230 million to acquire the San Diego, CA-based biopharmaceutical company Anadys. The reason for the acquisition is to bolster Roche’s standing in the hepatitis C market which is projected to grow to as much as $15 billion annually by 2019.

Anadys has a fairly large experimental pipeline of hepatitis C drugs, the most advanced candidate being setrobuivr that is being clinically tested in combination with the generic antiviral drug ribavirin and Pegasys (PEGylated α-interferon) as a hepatitis C treatment.

The Anadys deal comes on the heels of an agreement last week between Roche and Merck & Co to jointly market hepatitis C treatments in the US. Merck recently won approval last May for Victrelis (boceprevir) the first new hepatitis C treatment in over a decade. Also, late last month Vertex Pharmaceuticals received approval for a new hepatitis C drug called Incivek (telaprevir). Anadys is also conducting early clinical trials on ANA773 as a possible treatment for hepatitis C infection, cancer and other chronic diseases.

In other news, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is rumored to be contemplating purchasing Maryland-based Human Genome Sciences (HGS), which recently received US approval for Benlysta a novel monoclonal antibody treatment for the autoimmune disease systemic lupus erythematous. 

Benlysta was the first new drug to be approved to treat lupus in over 50 years. GSK is HGS’s commercialization partner for Benlysta which is expected to be a blockbuster drug. The reason for the takeover rumors is likely HGS’s stock price which has fallen from 52-week high of $30 to its current value of $15 per share. 

Until next time...

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

 

Breaking Up Is Hard to Do: Abbott Labs Announces Plans to Split into Two Separate Companies

Abbott Laboratories today announced that it will split itself into two companies by spinning off its branded prescription drug business and creating a second company responsible for its medical implants, diagnostic tests and baby formula businesses.

The pharmaceutical company will exclusively sell its branded prescription drugs (including its blockbuster biologic Humira) and will be lead by Abbott’s Richard Gonzalez who currently head the company’s pharmaceutical business. Current Abbott CEO Miles White will lead the diversified medical products company. 

The reason for the split is to allow investors to value each of the companies on their distinct characteristic. Abbott’s decision to split the company is consistent with the prevailing notion that companies that sell both prescription drugs and consumer products don’t perform well. This led Bristol Myers Squibb to sell off its medical devices and consumer products divisions several years ago. Interestingly, prescription pharmaceuticals/consumer products/medical devices were de rigueur in the 1990s and early 2000s. Abbott’s decision leaves companies like Pfizer, Novartis and Johnson & Johnson as examples of the few remaining companies that still house pharmaceuticals, devices and consumer goods under one roof. Don’t be surprised if in the future these companies also decide to spin off or divest themselves of their consumer goods/medical devices divisions.

Finally, while the split may be good for investors, it may not be that great for Abbott employees. Usually, spin offs or divestitures

Until next time..

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

 

Effects of Facebook on College Students

Facebook University
Created by: Online PhD

BioCareer Development Symposium

Last week, BioJobBlog in association with BVS, a life sciences vendor management company, launched an inaugural three hour career development workshop called BioCareer Development Symposium at New York University School of Medicine. 

The event which featured seminar topics  including "Writing a Winning Resume," "Interviewing Tips and Advice" and "Social Media and Career Development for LIfe Scientists" was well attended by graduate students, postdocs and mid-career life scientists.  In addition to the seminars, nine life sciences companies were on site to showcase the latest life sciences reagents, equipments and kits.

Future BioScience Career Development Symposia are scheduled @ Georgetown University, Johns Hopkins University, University of Alabama-Birmingham and the University of North Texas Health Sciences Center in Fort Worth, TX.

If your or your institution may be interested in hosting or learning more about our BioCareer Development Symposium offerings, please contact me.

Until next time....

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

Reputable Online Master's Degree Programs in Science, Engineering and IT

Online degree programs have exploded in the past 10 years or so and are now considered to be a legitimate way to earn a second or third degree to enhance the chances of finding a job in a tough economy. Further, an article that recently appeared in the NY Times “The Masters as the New Bachelor’s” suggested that Master's Degrees were supplanting bachelor degrees as the minimum requirement for employment in the US. Unfortunately, not everyone has the time to enroll in a traditional bricks and mortar Master's Degree program. This has forced many would-be students to enroll in online programs to earn a Master's Degree.

Like it or not, the reputation of the online institution that confers the degree will make a difference for jobseekers. In other words, an online Master's Degree from Penn State University will likely impress a hiring manager more than one from the University of Phoenix. With this in mind, my colleagues over at www.onlinemasters.org recently sent me an article entitled “The 15 Most Prestigious Online Master’s Programs” Most of the programs included on the list (see below) are relevant for those jobseekers interested in broadening their knowledge in the life sciences and healthcare, engineering and information technology (IT).

Auburn University: Electronically Delivered Graduate Education (EDGE) courses are offered online at the student’s convenience. Engineering programs include: Chemical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Computer Science and Software Engineering, Industrial and Systems Engineering, Materials Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering. Business programs include Accounting, Business Administration, and Management Information Systems. A combination MBA/MISE degree also is available.

Boston University: Boston University Distance Education offers master’s degrees in art education, criminal justice, music, computer information systems, health communication, management, manufacturing engineering, and social work. These programs provide students with an in-depth theoretical foundation as well as practical strategies for meeting demands of the marketplace. Many students have gone on to shape the future of their professions through their knowledge and leadership.

Carnegie Mellon University: Carnegie Mellon University’s H. John Heinz III College offers distance learning programs for Master of Science in Computer Science & IT (ranked #1 by U.S. News and World Report), Master of Medical Management (some onsite sessions required), and Master of Public Management (part-time and full-time tracks; work experience is required rather than GRE and GMAT).

DePaul University: Developing and providing degree programs for working adults for over 100 years, DePaul has been able to expand its reach by offering fully online master’s degree programs in various disciplines within the College of Computing and Digital Media, College of Education, and School of Public Service.

Duke University: By utilizing Duke’s resources in environmental science, engineering, policy, and business, the Nicholas School of the Environment’s Environmental Leadership Master of Environmental Management program gives students insight into the many aspects of environmental issues. The faculty includes recognized experts in the field whose research and publications affect important environmental and natural resource challenges.

Georgia Institute of Technology: Online master’s degrees are offered in aerospace engineering, computational science and engineering, electrical and computer engineering, industrial engineering, information security, mechanical engineering, medical physics, and operations research, in addition to a Professional Master in Applied Systems Engineering. Students study at their convenience, accessing a wealth of technological and industry knowledge while building a network of Georgia Tech faculty and industry professionals.

Indiana University: Kelley School of Business, through Kelly Direct, offers fully online MBA program, along with Master of Science degrees in finance, global supply chain management, and strategic management. There are also MBA dual-degree programs (mostly, but not fully, online) with Thunderbird (Master’s in Global Management) and Purdue (MSE and MS in Food and Agribusiness Management).

Johns Hopkins University: Here you’ll find master’s degree programs in bioinformatics, computer science, environmental engineering and science, environmental planning and management, and systems engineering — all can be completed fully online.

Michigan State University: In the online Master of Science in Criminal Justice program, students may choose to follow the general requirements for the Master’s in Criminal Justice, specialize in security management, or follow an international focus. Courses are offered entirely online, and are taught by the same faculty members that are involved in the on-campus program.

Pennsylvania State University: Over 100 years ago, Penn State founded one of the nation’s first correspondence courses. Now through their World Campus, they offer online master’s degrees in a wide range of areas including (to name a few) education, business administration, homeland security, nuclear engineering, and supply chain management. The online courses are flexible, yet the same academically challenging courses as on campus.

Stanford University: Students whose employers are members of the Stanford Center for Professional Development can earn Master of Science degrees while attending classes online on a part-time basis. Courses of study include aeronautics and astronautics, biomedical informatics, chemical engineering, civil and environmental engineering, computational and mathematical engineering, computer science, electrical engineering, management science and engineering, materials science and engineering, mechanical engineering, and statistics.

University of Florida: Most distance degrees may be taken on a part-time basis through this university. However, all degree programs require formal admission to the school. Master’s degrees are offered in various disciplines within the Colleges of Agriculture & Life Sciences; Business Administration; Design, Construction, and Planning; Education; Engineering; Fine Arts; Liberal Arts & Sciences; Nursing; Pharmacy; Public Health and Health Professions; and Veterinary Medicine.

University of Illinois: The Department of Computer Science offers a fully online Master’s in Computer Science program, which is restricted to off-campus professionals and is not intended for those who have access to on-campus courses and programs; although, all students receive the same lectures, class assignments, exams, and projects as on-campus students. The degree can be completed in as little as three years (at one course per semester), but must be completed within five years.

University of Southern California: USC Viterbi School of Engineering’s Distance Education Network (DEN) students view online the same lecture as on-campus students either live or at their convenience. Students interact by calling a toll-free phone number to ask the professor questions. Lectures are archived for the entire semester and can be downloaded.

Vanderbilt University School of Nursing: Vanderbilt’s School of Nursing offers a Master of Science in Nursing Health System Management. A Health Systems Manager is a registered nurse whose focus is on the management of health care delivery in various organizations. Graduates have the breadth of management knowledge and skills needed to perform effectively and assume leadership positions in health care delivery organizations.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Studying!!!!!!

 

How Failure Can Help a Career

Conventional wisdom suggests that failure or negative comments can be harmful or potentially damaging to the career trajectory of most people. While in many cases this may be true, sometimes they may have an opposite and unanticipated positive effect or benefit. This is certainly true for me.

Back in 1970, when I was a freshman in a mandatory first semester English Composition class, I clearly recall the time when the instructor decided to read aloud some of our first essays. Mine was selected and I swell with pride when my name was mentioned. I had fancied myself an excellent writer and I thought that she was going to use my essay as an example of outstanding writing. After reading my essay aloud, I expected laudatory comments and how wonderfully written it was. Imagine my shock, humiliation and shame when she excoriated my essay and used it as example of poor writing. I never forgot that moment and recall that at the time, I decided to “show” the instructor how wrong she was and dedicated the next 40 years to become the best writer that I could be. As many BioJobBlog readers may know, I am currently a professional medical/science writer. Despite my ability to make a living as a writer and no matter how many times I publish something, I never forget that moment in that long ago freshman composition class.

Until today, I thought that my experience was not common and somewhat unique. In her article entitled “How Insults Spur Success” Peggy Payne—a journalist and author of several books—tell a similar story of rejection and how it helped rather than hurt her. In Peggy’s case she was rejected at age 16 from a renowned summer camp for “brainy” teenage students. Despite her obvious successes as a journalist and author, like me, she has never forgotten the incident and like me, it continues to drive her to succeed. Likewise, she reports that her husband received a “devastating” F on his first philosophy paper in college. He has been a tenured faculty member for 35 years in the philosophy department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

In all of our cases, we decided to “show’em that they were wrong about us. And, interestingly, I think that “we have been trying to prove them wrong our entire lives. While this may work for some of us, it may not be universally true for others. In any event, the thing that most of us fear the most is failure. However, as many successful persons will tell you is that it took failure for them to realize their true potential. This is certainly true in my case. While not getting tenure was an overwhelmingly devastating event, that one failure freed me to explore other opportunities and discover that I can do other things beside research and be happier doing them than I ever would have been if I had received a tenured faculty appointment!

The point that I am trying to make is that failure, while scary, can actually be a good thing and help to define a live more positively than success. So, the next time that things are not going well for you, take a moment and analyze your situation. Then, attempt to figure out how you can turn a negative comment or presumed failure into a potentially positive outcome. While it may take some time to accomplish this, it certainly gives you a goal to work towards and ambition generally breed success!

Until next time...

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

 

A New Way Forward for FDA?

Last week, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner unveiled a “blueprint” that contained immediate and actionable steps that can be taken to spur innovation in the life sciences. The report’s proposals stem from a review of FDA’s current policies and practices, as well as months of meetings with major stakeholders nationwide, including key industry leaders, small biotech, pharmaceutical and medical device company owners, members of the academic community, and patient groups. Entitled “Driving Biomedical Innovation: Initiatives for Improving Products” the report focuses on seven major actions:

  1. rebuilding FDA’s small business outreach services
  2. building the infrastructure to drive and support personalized medicine
  3. creating a rapid drug development pathway for important targeted therapies
  4. harnessing the potential of data mining and information sharing while protecting patient privacy
  5. improving consistency and clarity in the medical device review process
  6. training the next generation of innovators
  7. streamlining and reforming FDA regulations

The blueprint was issued in response to growing concerns that—despite record investments in biomedical R&D—the drug pipelines at many US life sciences companies has grown exceedingly thin. Not surprisingly, most life sciences companies blame the agency for the thinning pipelines but in reality both side have contributed to the problem. Hamburg’s bold plan seems reasonable. But, it can only be implemented if Congress provides sufficient funding to underwrite the new initiatives proposed in the plan. And, while these funds ought to be allocated, it is not clear whether or not it is likely given the poor economy and the current, unprecedented political divisiveness that exists in Washington these days.

Moreover, Mark Senak, author of the Eye on FDA blog, suggests that FDA can improve its effectiveness by learning how to communicate better with its stakeholders. Mark, a social media advocate provides this compelling insight into FDA’s communication problems and the agency’s inability to grasp that the Internet and social media can help to improve its communication skills:

"The extremely long track record of FDA in attempting to figure out the Internet (first public meeting held in October 1996) and social media (first public meeting held in November, 2009) has yielded no guidance, with little transparency into the process.  It is time for FDA to seek outside communications expertise to help the agency better formulate policy on a timely basis."

While I believe that Commissioner Hamburg’s blueprint for improvement is a good one, it isn’t clear whether she will get the necessary support to implement it.

Until next time...

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

 

Occupy Wall Street Protest Targets Pharmaceutical Giant Pfizer

The Pharmalot Blog today reported that a group of protesters aligned with the Occupy Wall Street movement will conduct a vigil at Pfizer's Groton,CT R&D facility to protests recent job cuts made by the company. 

Pfizer was targeted because it took tens of millions of dollars in local and state government subsidies to build an R&D facility in New London, Connecticut. But earlier this year, the company abandoned the facility and decided to transfer about 1,100 R&D job from Groton to Cambridge, Massachusetts.Also, the company jettisoned its antibacterial drug discovery efforts at the Groton facility and shipped those jobs overseas to China.  Roughly, 2,500 Pfizer jobs are leaving Connecticut which will likely have a negative impact on the state.

One protest leader quipped “When huge companies like Pfizer take tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in public money, and then pull up stakes as soon as the money disappears, that’s what wrong with our economy”

Also, Pfizer is one of the top US ten companies to shed employees despite an estimated $48.2 billion in offshore funds that the company does not pay any taxes on. Between 2004 and 2011, the company  laid off  58,071.

Don't be surprised if the Occupy Wall Street Movement spreads from the banking to the pharmaceutical industry.  At this point there appears to be little distinction between the two!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

Big Changes In Store For Amgen Employees?

Remember when Amgen was the world’s largest and most profitable biotechnology company? That was way back in 2006 before its marketing and sales team got in trouble for “pushing” the sale of its erythropoietin (EPO) product Epogen and Aranesp beyond acceptable patient safety limits. This, along with a relatively thin new drug pipeline, has for the past five years or so relegated the company to second tier biotech company status.

To make matter worse, a company spokesperson mentioned its third-quarter earnings conference call today that the company is

 “...currently evaluating some changes within our Research & Development organization to improve focus and to reallocate resources to key pipeline assets and activities." This typically means that the possibility of layoffs is real. The last major restructuring of the company took place in 2007 and it resulted in the elimination of more than 2,000 jobs worldwide, including about 700 in Thousand Oaks.

This past June, Amgen announced plans to eliminate 134 jobs at two of its manufacturing sites in Colorado.

The company employs about 17,000 people, including about 6,200 in Thousand Oaks. Amgen also has research and development facilities in Thousand Oaks, South San Francisco,; Cambridge and Woburn, Mass.; Seattle; Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada; Abingdon, Cambridge and Uxbridge, Great Britain; and Regensburg, Germany.

In 2010, Amgen's revenue totaled $15.1 billion, while research and development cost $2.9 billion, according to the company. Its net profit last year totaled $4.63 billion, up slightly less than 1 percent from 2009.

Could this signal the beginning of the end of this once formidable biotechnology giant? If I was an Amgen employee I would be feverishly updating my CV right about now!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!

 

Sanofi Invests $300 Million in a Vaccine Manufacturing Facility in India

I am not sure how I missed this announcement last week but Sanofi Aventis will invest $300 million in a vaccine (biologics) manufacturing facility in India. The investment is in addition to the $784 million that Sanofi paid two years ago to acquire the Indian biologics company Shanta Biotech.

Sanofi executives originally thought that the purchase of Shanta would give immediately give them biologics manufacturing capability in South Asia. This did not occur because of manufacturing problems with the existing Shanta facility.  Sanofi claims to have corrected the manufacturing issues and investment of an additional $300 million into the facility is to bolster both R&D and manufacturing capacity. The new manufacturing facility is consistent with Sanofi’s publicly announced strategy of earning as much as 40 percent of its profits in emerging markets by 2015.

Like China, emerging markets like India, Brazil and Russia will be squarely on big pharma’s radar for the foreseeable future.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (in India!)

 

Parity for Women in the Workplace Is Still Lacking

Despite the fact that women in the US earn nearly 60 percent of four-year college degrees and make up almost half of the American workforce, women held about 14 percent of senior executive positions at Fortune 500 companies. An even lower percentage of female scientists hold tenure track faculty positions. 

Sadly, the number of female executives hasn’t budged since 2005 nor has there been an increase in appointment of women scientists to tenure track positions. This phenomenon is analyzed in a recent article written by Phyllis Korkki entitled “For Women, Parity IS Still a Subtly Steep Climb.” Experts interviewed in the article contend that the inability of women to reach parity in the workplace can be attributed to “entrenched sexism” in the workplace that is present both sexes. Ms Korkki describes how this plays out in the workplace and how it can be overcome by both men and women. 

The article is a fascinating and insight read: I highly recommend it!!!!

Until next time...

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

 

Okay, Maybe Big Pharma Layoffs Are Not Over: AstraZeneca to Eliminate 400 US Jobs

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!!!

 

Are Pharma Layoffs Over?

From 2001 to present, roughly 300,000 pharmaceutical employees have lost their jobs. That is a massive number; second only to the job losses in the automotive and financial services industries. The main reasons for the layoffs have been a lack of return on investment on R&D activities and impending patent cliffs in 2013 for as many as 15 blockbuster drugs. 

Ed Silverman who runs the Pharmalot blog speculated in a post yesterday that the number of pharma layoffs may be dwindling. His assertions are based on an analysis of the annual number of pharma layoffs provided by the outplacement firm of Challenger, Gray and Christmas. Ed’s wrote:

 “So far this year, pharma layoffs have totaled 19,076, and this includes the 13,000 job cuts planned by Merck, which is actually eyeing many foreign positions, therefore, swelling the latest tally. Last year, pharma eliminated 53,636 jobs, down from 61,109 in 2009, when annual layoffs peaked. In fact, the 2009 bloodletting was outsized compared with every other year - the next highest annual layoff tally occurred in 2008, when 43,014 industry cuts were announced. Between 2003 and 2007, the number of jobs that were eliminated ranged from about 15,000 to 31,000 annually, according to the firm.”

This led Ed to posit that the worst may be over and those pharma employees who still have jobs may be able to relax a bit. However, it is important to note (as Ed also points out) that many big companies are still purchasing or opening new  R&D and manufacturing facilities in emerging markets like India and China and more and more R&D jobs are being outsourced. Further, while many US pharma reps have lost their jobs hiring reps in emerging markets continues to explode. Interestingly jobs that are in demand and still available to Americans include those in regulatory affairs, compliance, IT, clinical operations and marketing. Unfortunately, these are very specialized jobs and many of those pharma employees who have been layed off lack the requisite skills to compete for those jobs!

While I think we may have seen the last of massive layoff in big pharma, smaller and less publicized layoffs will likely continue at many US life sciences companies. The downsizing trend taking place in America will likely continue until drug pipelines are populated with new candidates and life science executive realize that outsourcing R&D job is not a viable solution for their productivity problems.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Maximizing Patient Engagement During Clinical Trials

Recruiting, retaining and managing patients that participate in clinical trials for approval of new medicines and devices have becoming very challenging in the past decade or more. Ironically, the ready availability of experimental new medicines in the US for certain therapeutic areas including oncology, neuroscience and vaccines have forced life sciences companies and CROs to conduct many Phase I and Phase II trials outside of the US. In turn, the globalization of clinical trials has forced many sponsors to increasingly rely on e-based and mobile solutions for patient recruitment, retention and compliance.

The Advance Learning Institute’s conference entitled “Patient Recruitment, Compliance And Retention For Clinical Trials: Integrating The Latest Technologies With Traditional Tools To Maximize Patient Engagement” that will be held in Manhattan on October 24-26, 2011 will provide attendees with insights into the best practices to maximize patient engaged in clinical trials. Presentations will be given by a variety of pharmaceutical companies, CROs and academic institutions including Pfizer, Merck Research Laboratories, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Celgene Corporation, Quintiles, Omniscience Mobile, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. A complete agenda for the conference can be found here.

Those of you who mention BioJobBlog or BioCrowd when registering for the conference will receive a $200 registration discount.

See you at the meeting!!!!!!!

Until next time...

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

 

Merck Announces More Layoffs

After a relatively quiet summer, big pharma companies are beginning to ramp up layoffs once again. Novartis recently announced that more job cuts were likely and last week I got wind of Merck’s impending reorganization and layoffs from a colleague whose partner works for the company. Today, Merck formally announced that it had sent e-mails to employees about the new round of layoffs. Last July, Merck said that it planned to cut 12 percent to 13 percent of its workforce of about 100,000 by 2015 as it adjusts to market conditions and its 2009 acquisition of Schering Plough.

The layoffs will be part of the company’s restructuring of “select HQ functions and field groups within the U.S. Market: Marketing & Customer Solutions; Managed Markets & Policy; Strategy & Commercial Model Innovation; and the Neuropsychiatric and Women's Healthcare specialty sales teams,"

While it is not clear how many workers will be layed off during the next round of downsizing, industry insiders are speculating that about 5,200 of the total cuts could be U.S. jobs, with from 3,000 to 4,000 in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. A Merck spokesman would not comment on the state-by-state plans. The cuts through October won't be the end of the process, though.

In August, the company offered buyout packages to some employees, but it is unlikely that buyouts and voluntary retirements alone would meet the numbers that Merck executive expect to make. Interestingly, Merck spokespersons said that the company will continue to add new employees but cut jobs elsewhere. I suspect that most of the cuts will come in R&D and sales as they have in the past.

Until next time...

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

 

More Workforce Diversity is Needed in the Life Sciences

As scientists, we all  subscribe to the notion that diversity is a critical component to the evolution of any species. While we this is a well known fact, the life sciences industry, like others, struggles with workforce diversity mainly in the area of research and development. For example the number of minority students—blacks and hispanics—who receive PhD degrees is miniscule as compared with their white counterparts.  Graduate schools struggle to promote diversity in their programs but their efforts to date have been lackluster.

One of the factors that contribute to the lack of representation of minority students in the life sciences may be the lack of access to equal educational opportunities. With this in mind, the folks over at onlinecolleges.net sent me a post that has a plethora of information about the state of minority education in the US. I culled relevant information from the list and reproduced it for this post.

Stereotyping impairs performance

A startling Ohio State University study exploring the effects of racial stereotyping uncovered some very unfortunate truths. Nearly 160 African-American students were asked to write an essay about an average college student, either named "Tyrone" or "Erik," with the implication being that the former is black and the latter white. Those assigned Tyrone scored an average of 4.5 on a standardized test, while Team Erik ended up with 6.2. Although possessing equal academic aptitude, researchers believe prevailing stereotypes negatively impact performance — thus creating an unjust cycle reinforced by students and teachers alike. 

Hispanic high school students had the highest dropout rate in 2009

The National Center for Educational Statistics shows that 17.6% of Hispanic high school students drop out before completing their diplomas or GEDs. Reasons vary from kid to kid, of course, and do not necessarily denote poor grades or discipline. On a positive note, however, Hispanic dropout rates decline steadily every year, with 2008 seeing 18.3% of the high school population leaving before graduating. 

Minorities comprise 32% of undergraduate enrollees

Undergraduate enrollment has actually increased among all racial and ethnic demographics, although minorities remain heavily underrepresented on American college campuses. Only 32% of postsecondary students are minorities as of 2004 statistics, but their numbers increase yearly — certainly a positive trend. Between 1976 and 2004, Asians and Pacific Islanders experienced the highest rate of increase, boasting a whopping 461%. So while the number still seems low these days, minorities are definitely catching up on campus and enjoy more opportunities to have their voices heard and heeded.

Minorities comprise 25% of graduate enrollees

With increased minority undergraduate enrollment came more representation in graduate programs, though at a slower pace. 2004 statistics showed that 25% of master’s and doctoral students were minorities, up from 11% in 1976. The most rampant increase occurred among Hispanics, at 377%. Once again, there’s absolutely nothing "scary" about more opportunities and representation in higher education. But the numbers could definitely be higher, especially since more enrollees means more imperative to address diverse needs.

Minorities comprise 10.2% of private school principals

In total, of course, as statistics vary rapidly depending on what — if any — denomination owns and operates the schools in question. Seventh-Day Adventist institutions lead the way, with 26.4% minority principals. Administrators of black, non-Hispanic or Latino descent are most prevalent, particularly in Seventh-Day Adventist (17.7%) and Pentecostal (14.7%) schools. They also make up 5.2% of total minority principals. When it comes to private education, more needs doing to ensure minority students and staff alike see their requests properly met.

The majority of black and Hispanic students attend high-poverty schools

Statistics from 2005 school year revealed that black and Hispanic students populate high-poverty schools more than any other minority. The National Center for Education Statistics considers "high-poverty schools," which are those with 75% or more attendees receiving free or reduced-price lunches. Forty-eight percent of black and 49% of Hispanic 4th graders hail from such desperately wanting institutions, while Asians and Pacific Islanders are more evenly distributed across economic demographics. 

Hispanic and black students are less likely to have internet access at home

Because of this, they adapt to classroom technology at a slower pace than their white, Asian and Native American peers. Twenty-six percent of Hispanic and 27% of black students use the internet at home, compared to 58% of Asian and 47% of Native American kids, resulting in a very unfortunate achievement gap. Numbers are improving, of course, but there’s still a ways to go before the gulf starts shrinking.

Schools with black or Hispanic majorities are more likely to hire underqualified or novice teachers

In fact, 25% of math educators at schools with 50% or more black students do not hold a degree or any other qualifications in the subjects they teach — probably the most egregious example. And once said teachers rack up the experience, they usually flee to more affluent (and white) areas. Such an unfortunate and enduring phenomenon plays a major role in perpetuating, if not outright widening, the achievement gap. Without knowledgeable, experienced and engaged teachers, students in affected schools typically lag behind and never receive the academic opportunities that should be afforded all youngsters. 

More black students repeat grades than any other racial or ethnic demographic

Both genders, too. In 2007, 25.6% of black males and 15.3% of black females between kindergarten and 12th grade had repeated at least one grade. These numbers, though, only reflect the issue as it relates to public school students. 

More black students receive suspensions and expulsions than any other racial or ethnic demographic

Between 6th and 12th grades, the 2007 school year saw 49.5% of black males and 34.7% of black females reporting that they had received at least one suspension in their academic careers. When it comes to expulsions, 16.6% of males and 8.2% of females said they had been dismissed from school at least once.

Hispanic teenagers have the highest pregnancy rate

In 2007, 81.7 out of every 1,000 Hispanic teenage girls gave birth — more than any other race or ethnicity. Across all demographics, however, the numbers are steadily decreasing.

This probably has something to do with improved sex education and easier access to necessary birth control devices, though the problem still requires considerable intervention. Especially since popping out babies as a high schooler is all trendy these days.

Clearly, until some of these problems are addressed, then it is likely that workforce diversity in the life sciences will continue to lag.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Employment Update: Some Biomanufacturers and Biotech Companies are Expanding!

While big pharma companies continue to shed jobs, there are some indications that the biotechnology industry is beginning to pick up some steam. For example, Boehringer Ingelheim (both a drug development and biomanufacturing company) is planning a $383 million expansion of its facilities in Ridgefield, CT. Likewise, Cary, NC-based Biologics a biotech cancer treatment company expects to almost double it staff from 85 to about 150 employees by the end of 2012. Finally, Gilead Sciences is undertaking a massive expansion of its Foster City corporate headquarters and expects to increase its workforce there from 1,700 to as many as 3,400 workers.

Although these expansions are only a few in number, they may be a harbinger of things to come in the US life sciences industry. One can only hope!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

UK Regulatory Agency Considering Using Social Media for Adverse Events Reporting

Over two years ago at the beginning of the social media/pharma debate, I proposed that social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook would be great for adverse event reporting for drugs, biologics and medical devices. At the time, the suggestion was largely ignored and relegated to the category of “unlikely to happen anytime in my lifetime.” 

Imagine my delight after reading a post on today’s Pharmalot Blog which suggested that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)—the UK equivalent of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—is considering whether to allow the public to use Twitter and Facebook to report side effects and adverse events.

According to the Pharmalot post:

"The MHRA is now “actively working on introducing other ways of reporting to make it easier and encourage more reporting,” Mick Foy, the MHRA group manager for vigilance and risk management of medicines, tells GP. “Applications for smartphones, improved web reporting forms and the use of social media such as Twitter and Facebook are being carefully considered as potential routes for reporting.”

While the MHRA is considering the use of social media, it is not clear that the agency will ultimately adopt Twitter, Facebook or other mobile applications for adverse event reporting. Like in the US, possible adverse reported in the UK must meet several criteria before they are verified and considered to be reportable adverse events. Despite potential problems and pitfalls, the fact that the MHRA is even considering social media as a means to improve adverse event reporting is laudable; considering the fact that FDA has yet to provide guidance on the use of social media in the US life sciences industry. Many companies, social media advocates and mobile app developers have been waiting for the said guidance for almost two years now.

Like it or not, social media is now part of the social fabric of today’s world. Rather than fighting its implementation, life sciences companies would use their considerable creative talent to figure out how to integrate and leverage social media (in non-promotional ways) to their benefit.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting and Following!!!!

 

New Group To Examine Ways to Help Graduate Students Move Into Careers

According to an article that appeared in the online version of The Chronicle of Higher Education website the Council of Graduate Schools and the Educational Testing Service  last Thursday that they are creating a commission to study and recommend ways to help graduate students move more easily through their training and into careers.

The commission aptly named The Commission on Pathways Through Graduate School and Into Careers, is composed of college officials and business leaders and will examine how much graduate students know about their career options once they obtain their degrees. Further it will also look into how students learn about their professional opportunities after graduation and the role of graduate programs in guiding students in their transition to a career.  The findings uncovered by the commission will likely be reported sometime next spring.

Ironically, the impetus for creating the commission was a report released in 2010 that urged the US to make it a national priority to improve graduate education and attract more students to pursue graduate degrees to prevent the country’s decline in global competitiveness. By 2018, the report estimated about 2.5 million more jobs will require graduate degrees. I am not sure what the authors of the report were smoking at the time that they prepared it, but I for one do not think we need more people with advanced degrees; especially in the life sciences. That being said, since the PhD-producing machine will not stop until tenure is abolished, the next best thing is for graduate programs to provide incoming students with a “real-life” perspective on career opportunities and the training necessary to pursue them. At present, career development programs and career counseling services are virtually non-existent at most universities and colleges. 

While formation of the commission is laudable, I am not convinced that it will accomplish anything except possibly assuage growing graduate student and postdoc discontent at many academic institutions. The reason why my expectations are low is a comment made by Patrick Osmer, the commission chair and vice provost for graduate studies and dean of the Graduate School at Ohio State University, who said

“It is important to create a dialogue with graduate students and with employers, and to listen to the students' concerns and expectations about career paths beyond academe.”

Personally, I don’t think that the lack of dialogue between graduate students and prospective employers is the problem. The real problem is the lack of care development discussions between graduate students and their advisors; many of whom don’t know or care about career options for the persons who they train. Until graduate programs recognize that career development counseling and training are in their bailiwick, then nothing is going to change regardless of findings of one or more “expert” commission run by individuals who are part of the problem!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!   

 

Link Longevity

As a blogger and an occasional Twitter user (believe me I would tweet more if I didn’t have to work for a living), I have often wondered how much of an impact that the links I post have on readers and followers. While there is little doubt that the posted links persist into perpetuity, it was not clear how long people continued to click or follow the links after they were posted. That is; until now!

According to new research by Bit.ly, the URL shortening service, most links shared online don’t live very long. The longevity of different links was determined by calculating the “half-life” (the point at which a link received half of its total online clicks) of links posted on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, e-mail or chat clients.  

After analyzing 1,000 popular links on Bit.ly, it was determined that the average half-life of a link on Twitter was 2.8 hours. Links posted to Facebook lasted slightly longer at 3.2 whereas the longevity for e-mail and chat links was 3.4 hours. Interestingly, the average half-life of YouTube links was 7.4 hours and that of news-related links was a mealy five minutes! 

The conclusion—people spend way too much time watching videos on YouTube and pay little attention to current events. Duh, like I didn’t already know that!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Link Following.....

 

Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Getting a PhD Degree...And Then Some!

While getting a PhD degree in the life sciences (or most other disciplines) is no longer de rigueur, those of you out there who are courageous enough to make the attempt may benefit from an article entitled “25 Q&A Sites for PhD Information and Requirements.

The folks over @ phdonlinedegree.com sent me the link and the information offered in the post is very good. That being said, let me state for the record that if I had to do it all over again—despite my somewhat unconventional and circuitous career path—I will still choose to obtain my PhD degree. If nothing else, earning a PhD builds character and shows you that if you try hard enough almost anything is possible!

For those of you who may be on the fences between a Masters or PhD degree, sites like Did the PhD Kill the Masters Degree? and Master’s vs. PhD Programs may be helpful. For those of you who are considering PhD degrees but need to learn more about the degree, check out PhD explained & FAQs or Questions to Ask When Thinking About Pursuing a PhD. Those of you ambitious types or may be interested in pursing an MD/PhD degree may want to check out What’s the difference between MD/PhD programs and MST Programs or NIH MD/PhD Partnership Training Program FAQs [PDF]

Finally, those of you who may not yet be convinced that a PhD degree in the life sciences is right for you may want to visit On Getting a PhD Degree in the Life Sciences.

And, if none of these sites answer your questions, you can always ask me!

Until next time...

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

 

Pharma and Social Media: Lilly Launches A YouTube Channel

Mark Senak, author of the outstanding EyeonFDA blog, tweeted today, that Eli Lilly & Co had launched a YouTube Channel. According to a post on the company’s blog Lilly Pad, its new channel dubbed the “Lilly Health Channel” will “videos on health and wellness, employee and community outreach efforts, health innovation, Lilly programs and other non-product-branded initiatives.”

While the announcement of a launch of another pharma-sponsored YouTube channel is no longer new or novel, Eli Lilly has been trying to transform itself into a modern, social media and crowdsourcing-focused pharmaceutical company. For example, Lilly is one of only a handful of big pharma companies that sponsors its own corporate blog. Moreover, the company is a leader in using so-called crowdsourcing to discover and develop potential new drugs. It has spun off at least two ventures that utilize a crowdsourcing approach to new drug discovery. Finally, unlike most other big pharma CEOs, its chief executive John Lechleiter has been outspoken about the lack of innovation and available workforce talent in the US life sciences industry. 

Is Lilly truly the pharmaceutical company of the future? That remains to be seen! 

Until next time... 

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!

 

Post Labor Day Job Cut Report

Despite the fact that no new jobs were added to the US economy in August, things were pretty quiet in the pharmaceutical layoff space. From what I was able to find, it appears that Alcon Laboratories will be moving about 100 jobs from Atlanta to Fort Worth Texas (I was recently in Fort Worth for the first time and I extend my sympathies to those Atlantans that may make the move). The consolidation is taking place because Novartis purchased Alcon in April and after acquisitions these sorts of things happen. Nestle, another Swiss company, had a majority ownership in Alcon. 

Interestingly, there appears to be some consolidation also taking place in the contract manufacturing space. Contract Pharma announced that it would close its Buffalo, NY manufacturing facility (purchased from Bristol Myers Squibb in 2005) and eliminate 128 jobs. Those employees who do not lose their jobs may have an opportunity to work in a nearby Ontario, Canada site. Likewise, UK-based United Drug, another CMO, will cut 150 jobs because of government-led regulatory decision to reduce health spending.

While none of these announcements were particularly noteworthy, Sanofi-Aventis’ announcement today that it will cut $2.9 billion in costs over the next few years was somewhat shocking but not unexpected. Most of the cuts will be in R&D and there will undoubtedly be massive downsizing and reorganization. 

According to a post on today’s Pharmalot blog “a presentation indicates that research and development costs are in the process of being cut by 12 percent from 2008 to about $1.1 billion, excluding Genzyme. And the total headcount over this same period is being reduced by about 22 percent, from roughly 13,000 positions to about 10,000 jobs by the end of this year, again excluding Genzyme.”

Today’s announcement of cut back is consistent with Sanofi’s business strategy over the past year or so which included plant closings and large sales rep layoffs Again, the Pharmalot blog reported “The upcoming round involves slashing about $700 million in expenses from Genzyme, the biotech that Sanofi purchased recently, as oncology units in the Boston area are combined.”

The cost cutting measures are in response to the impending loss of patent exclusivity for several of its blockbuster products most notably Plavix and unexpected attrition in the company’s late stage clinical development portfolio. This year sales of products facing patent expiry are expected to decline to $4.2 billion as compared with $10.6 billion in 2008. To cope with these difficulties, Sanofi has gone on a buying spree over the last couple of years spending $23 billion to acquire various companies with Genzyme being the crown jewel.

Meanwhile, Sanofi plans to file for approval of six new drugs this year and hopes that it can introduce 19 new drugs by 2015. I suspect that Sanofi’s aggressive M&A strategy may help the company reach that goal. That said, if I was a Sanofi or Genzyme employee, I would be dusting off the old resume right about now.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!! 

Jooble: A New Job Search Engine

New job search engines come and go. That said, I was recently contacted by the folks who run Jooble, a job search engine that operates in over 42 countries. While I haven’t used it myself, this is what the company has to say about it.

“Jooble is a vertical job search engine that works in 42+ countries. We continue to expand our job database and each day Jooble has more than 100,000 new job listings

You may use the advanced search in Jooble and enter key words, such as location (city, state), salary ranges, date posted and many other options. Moreover, users can subscribe to our free mailing list which entitles you to daily e-mails delivery of the latest job listings based on keyword searches. This service will improve and accelerate your changes of finding that dream job. Please feel free to subscribe to our mailing list if you wish to get the best and latest job announcements.

Jooble operates in 42+ countries, so if you would like to find a job in other locations you may try to search jobs in: 

Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Belarus, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Italy, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Japan, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia , South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey , Venezuela, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States

Just Jooble and find your dream job in just few clicks!”

Check it out!

Until next time..

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

 

The 2011 Summer Pharmaceutical Jobs Layoff Report

Layoffs at big pharma tend to slow during the summer as most people are on vacation and nobody wants to fire folks when the kids are out of school. However, the failing economy has prompted several companies to abandon tradition and fire people during the summer anyway.

According to the Pharmalot Blog, previously announced layoffs at Merck have been accelerated and approximately 8,000 more employees will lose their jobs in early August. While the layoffs were not unexpected, those affected likely thought that they had more time before being shown the door.

In other news, Elan announced that it was laying off 104 employees at its King of Prussia, PA facility. The layoffs resulted from the sale of Élan’s manufacturing facility to Alkermes for $960 million. The acquisition gives Alkermes a chemical formulation and manufacturing business and a stake in two recently approved drugs; Ampyra for multiple sclerosis and Invega Sustenna a treatment for schizophrenia. The layoffs will occur next month and the facility will be closed in September.

Finally, a recent KPMG LLP survey of top executives of US drug makers indicates that M&A activity will continue to increase over the next several years as pharma companies attempt to offset rising generic competition and waning drug revenues. At present, roughly 70 percent of all medications sold in the US are generics. 

Eighty-three percent of the executives believe that their companies will be buyers or sellers in deals over the next two years. Further, just over half believe that it will take more than two years for the US economy to fully recover.

While M&A activity isn’t a bad thing for some companies, it is typically followed by reorganizations and massive job layoffs which are obviously not good for rank and file employees. Consequently, if I worked for a major pharma or biotechnology company, I would definitely make sure that my CV was up-to-date!

Until next time...

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

 

A Death Knell For Social Media and Pharma?

For the past few years, I along with many others have advocated the use of social media platforms (mainly Facebook, Twitter and YouTube) by life sciences companies. Despite a very positive beginning by companies like Novo Nordisk, Johnson and Johnson and others, the implementation of social media in the life sciences industry has been stymied by a lack of regulatory guidance by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and legal and commercialization concerns. While many believe that FDA guidance on the topic will be the panacea that they were waiting for, I personally don’t believe that it will make one bit of difference. That said, Steve Woodruff, the author of the IMPACTIVITI Blog, provides one of the best analyses that I have encountered that explains why social media and pharma don’t work well.

In a post entitled “Time to Give Up on Pharma and Social Media,” Steve cogently provides four compelling reasons why it will be difficult for pharma to ever embrace social media for commercial purposes. They include 1) the lack of regulatory guidance; 2) pharma does not communicate or interact in real time; 3) personnel turnover, short term thinking, lack of innovation and too much focus on quarterly profits; and 4) pharma’s addiction to centralized, one-way controlled communications. His bottom line:

Public, interactive, real-time social media platforms and commercial pharma communications simply don’t mesh well 

While I agree with Steve that social media may not be ideal for commercial purposes in the prescription life sciences industry, it may be perfectly well suited for pharmacovigilance and adverse event reporting, clinical trial recruitment and management, education, community outreach and employee recruitment and retention. These are not new ideas. But, because they cost money to implement and don’t contribute the most company’s revenue-driven bottom lines, life sciences companies have not actively explored or embraced them for these purposes. 

Whether big pharma and biotech companies like it or not, social media is here to stay. And, if these companies fail to act soon, they eventually will begin to lose their competitive edges and perhaps more importantly, market share. 

Until next time.. 

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

 

 

New Thoughts on Pharmacovigilance, Adverse Event Reporting and Social Media

About a year ago, I suggested that real time social media platforms like Twitter could be invaluable tools for adverse event (AE) reporting and related pharmacovigilance activities. However the mere mentioned of the dreaded AE causes many marketing, legal and regulatory affairs professionals at major pharmaceutical companies to break out into a cold sweat. 

As Mark Senak aptly pointed out in a recent post on his blog EyeonFDA,

“...the reporting of adverse events using social media has long been the bogeyman feared by the legal and regulatory departments of drug manufacturers in the US.”

Further, Mark rightly asserts:

“....the adverse event issue may have proven a red herring.  That is perhaps evidenced by the now large number of Twitter feeds that are active representing pharmaceutical manufacturing companies and even their products; the growing, though not as quickly and not with as much success, presence of YouTube channels; the large number of Facebook pages and even an uptick in the number of corporate sponsored blogs – now at five by my count.  If the adverse event reporting issue really were an issue, this presence would be shrinking, not growing.”

So, what is the “real reason” why drug manufacturers refuse to embrace social media like almost every other industry that I can think of? True, FDA has not yet issued its long awaited guidance on the use of social and digital media in the life science industry. But, the lack of guidance has not prevented pharma and biotech companies from innovating in the past. I suspect that one of the reasons why many companies refuse to adopt social media is the requisite transparency and interactivity that are typically associated with its use. And, perhaps more importantly is the perceived loss of control over product messaging that companies with approved drugs on the market have enjoyed for the past 50 years or more.

Whatever the reasons are, I still contend that social media platforms are ideal tools for AE reporting and pharmacovigilance activities. Hopefully, drug makers will come to realize this with or without FDA guidance on the topic.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!

 

Are US Immigration Laws Really Hurting Life Science Innovation?

A report in Bloomberg News today suggested that Eli Lilly & Co. Chief Executive Officer John Lechleiter, PhD told a technology conference today that unfavorable US permanent resident (green card) laws are to blame for declining US innovation in the life sciences. With this in mind, Lechleiter plans on calling for US immigration officials to issue more green cards and adopt a shorter and simpler process for highly skilled foreign nationals to gain permanent residence in the US. According to Dr. Lechleiter, one of only a handful of big pharma CEO who is also a PhD-trained scientist, current green card regulations are so-called job killers and force many talented foreign nationals to return to their native countries to work with firms that directly compete with American life sciences companies. Unlike most of his peers, Lechleiter has been very outspoken about the lack of US life sciences innovation.

While Lechleiter comments may have been appropriate five or more years ago, they are no longer germane to America’s waning innovation in the life sciences. There is little doubt that many bright and talented foreign nationals were denied permanent residency during the Bush era (2000 to 2008) because of stringent immigration policies and limits on the numbers of green cards allotted for persons from certain parts of the world; mainly China, India and the Middle East. This, in turn, forced many life scientists—many of whom desperately wanted permanent residency in the US—to return to their home countries to look for work and gainful employment.

As Lechleiter rightly asserts, these scientists found work with companies that began to directly compete with US life sciences. This phenomenon, coupled with the rapid assent of the middle class in many of these nations, made it possible to begin to conduct Western style research at a much lower costs in these countries. To that end, by 2007, most big pharma companies—many of whom had dwindling pipelines and monstrous overhead costs—realized that it would be more cost effective to outsource or move R&D to countries with emerging pharmaceutical and biotechnology markets and a well trained R&D workforce. And, for the past four years downsizing and outsourcing of R&D are exactly what have been taking place at many American big pharma and biotechnology companies.

In my opinion, the larger question that must be addressed, as far as US innovation in the life sciences is concerned is: why are so few Americans willing to pursue scientific careers? To wit, the main reason why so many foreign life scientists were educated and trained in the US over the past 20 years was because there weren’t enough American students to fill the incoming roster at most American graduate training programs. Put simply, America’s growing lack of innovation in the life sciences over the past decade can be directly attributed to far fewer Americans pursuing scientific careers and an increased reliance on foreign nationals—who were unable to stay in the US—to innovate! While changing US immigration laws may allow some foreign nationals to more easily remain in the US, there simply aren’t enough life sciences jobs left in the US to make it worth their while! In fact, the likelihood of them finding life sciences jobs in their home countries is now greater than it is in the US. In my opinion, the only way to restore American innovation in the life sciences is to convince American students that pursuing scientific careers is worthwhile and that the requisite training for industry jobs is available to them.

Interestingly, after leading with changes to US immigration laws, Lechleiter also suggested that America’s innovation problem could be solved by lowering US corporate tax rates and American companies should not be forced to pay taxes on oversea earnings. Also, he asserted that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should stop putting off decisions or erring on the side of avoiding risk when considering new drug applications. 

This begs the questions, how do lower taxes, no overseas taxes and expedited drug approvals help to spur American innovation when most life sciences R&D is conducted outside of the US?

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Innovating!!!!!!!!

 

Improve Your Job Prospects By Using LinkedIn

Last week, financial analysts and social media enthusiast were all a twitter (sorry I couldn’t resist) about LinkedIn’s multibillion dollar IPO. There is little doubt that LinkedIn has emerged as the preeminent job search social media platform. However, there are a few “tricks” that jobseekers ought to consider to improve their job prospects and subsequent employment.

To that end, Paul Boutin wrote a great piece in the Gadgetwise section of the NY Time yesterday entitled “Three Things All LinkedIn Users Should Do.” It was so well written that I reproduced much of the post below.

“Post a photo – A few years ago, people who posted photos of themselves to the Internet seemed self centered. In the Facebook, era, though, an account page without a picture seems like the work of someone who didn’t put much effort into it. It doesn’t need to be a professional headshot. Just stand against a white wall in business attire (or, if you’re a software engineer, a Rush t-shirt) and have someone take a cellphone photo of your face and shoulders. To upload your photo, choose the option Profile -> Edit Profile at the top of your LinkedIn page, and look for the Add Photo link.

Think keywords – On the same Edit Profile page, take a good look at your resume. If your past employers gave you odd titles like “gatorbox wrangler” or vague ones like “senior administrator,” replace them with industry standard terms like “sales engineer” and “accounts payable specialist.” Otherwise, you’ll never be found, because no one will type those terms into LinkedIn’s search box.

Search experts call this problem “discovery.” Other people won’t find you if they aren’t searching for words that match your entry. Pack your LinkedIn profile with as many popular job terms as you can think of related to what you do. If you can honestly change a past job title from something like “Web producer,” to something more senior like “product manager,” it’s better to put it  in your profile, so you can at least get found and get an interview.

Ask a question – A LinkedIn spokeswoman told me that sending a question to your LinkedIn network is one of the best ways to remind people that you still exist, and are still looking for work. Click the menu option More -> Answers at the upper right of the LinkedIn home page, and look for the box that says “Ask a Question.” Get to the point: “Does anyone know of an office administrator position with a full-time salary and benefits?” These days that might get you a part-time contract, but it’s probably better than blindly sending out resumes and watching your inbox in vain.”

If LinkedIn is too overwhelming or more time consuming than you are willing to invest, check out BioCrowd, an online networking site designed EXCLUSIVELY for life scientists and other bioprofessionals.

Hat tip to Paul Boutin and the NY Times!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting  (check out the BioJobCenter)

 

More Evidence That Big Pharma's Investment in R&D Will Continue to Wane

There is no longer any doubt that big pharma companies are beginning to reduce their emphasis on internal R&D activities. Instead the companies will increasingly rely on outsourcing, partnerships, closer collaborations with academia, public private partnerships and M&A to keep their drug development pipelines full

Therefore it was not surprising when Merck’s new CEO, Kenneth Frazier recently mentioned in a conference call to financial analysts and investors that its multi-billion spending on new drug R & D will likely decline as a percentage of overall sales in the coming years. Merck is one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world

According to an article on Nasdaq.com, in 2010, Merck spent $11 billion on R&D, or 24% of total sales. Adjusted to exclude certain acquisition-related and other costs, R&D spending was $8.1 billion. Merck has predicted 2011 adjusted R&D spending would be $8.1 billion to $8.5 billion for 2011.

Frazier, the first African American CEO of a major pharmaceutical company, came under pressure earlier this year after he decided to not substantially cut R&D as many of Merck’s rivals, most notably Pfizer, did. He noted that cuts in R&D spending would have jeopardized Merck’s long term product development pipeline.

While rumors persist that Merck may be seeking to jettison its non-pharmaceutical consumer health and animal health businesses, Frazier insisted that the two units are complementary to its core pharmaceutical and vaccine focus and are not for sale. That said, if I was a Merck employee in either of those divisions, I would be updating my resume just about now.

Until next time...

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

 

The Rumor Mill: Is Cubist Really In Play?

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!!!!!!!!

 

Pharmaceutical Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) Advertising Goes Mobile

While big pharma continues to struggle with the use of social media to promote its products, direct-to-consumer advertising (DTC), the method of choice for American pharmaceutical advertising is alive, well and robust. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that big pharma is reallocating some its traditional DTC advertising dollars to deliver drug ads to mobile devices which are growing in popularity. 

According to a recent article posted on PharmaLive, drug companies are mainly using mobile devices —in addition to delivering ads—to “help educate patients and motivate them to seek, accept, and adhere to therapy.” In other words, to more effectively promote their products to improve sales and corporate profits. Regardless of the motive, medical communication agencies have recognized the trend and have responded by launching mobile divisions and initiatives at their firms. Some agencies are now generating close to 50% of their revenues from mobile initiatives and campaigns. Further, many pharmaceutical companies have finally realized that corporate websites can be more than simple placeholders on the Internet. To that end, the PharmaLive post notes that pharmaceutical brand websites are evolving into a robust resource structured to be easily searchable and maintained. Maybe a better understanding and use of social media is next up for drug makers.

Pfizer remains the leading spender and purveyor of DTC advertising despite a 15% overall decrease in 2010 as compared with 2009. PharmLive reports that the company allocated $903.8 million to brands such as Lipitor, Pristiq, Viagra, Chantix, and Lyrica. Of these brands, Pristiq saw the highest increase of DTC advertising in 2010, up 17% to $122.2 million compared to 2009.

As mobile media continues to grow, don’t be surprised if someone develops a TIVO-like fast forward app to skip all of the DTC ads on your iPhone or android devices.

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

An Academic Perspective: Explaining the Current Glut of Life Sciences PhDs

For the past several years, I have been trying to convince anyone who would listen that the reason for the dismal job prospects for most PhD-trained scientists is a simple supply and demand issue. To wit, there are too many PhDs and too few jobs for them! 

While I intuitively understood that this was the case, nobody had ever substantiated the veracity of the claim and consequently I was beginning to think I was wrong. Imagine my joy after reading William Deresiewicz’s piece in this month’s edition of the The Nation magazine. In an article entitled “Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education,” Deresiewicz elegantly and aptly sums up the situation facing today’s newly minted PhDs:

"At Yale, we were overjoyed if half our graduating students found positions. That’s right—half........You’d think departments would respond to the Somme-like conditions they’re sending out their newly minted PhDs to face by cutting down the size of their graduate programs. If demand drops, supply should drop to meet it. In fact, many departments are doing the opposite, the job market be damned. More important is maintaining the flow of labor to their domestic sweatshops, the pipeline of graduate students who staff discussion sections and teach introductory and service courses like freshman composition and first-year calculus. (Professors also need dissertations to direct, or how would they justify their own existence?)

Further, he asserts:

“......the PhD glut works well for departments at both ends, since it gives them the whip hand when it comes to hiring new professors. Graduate programs occupy a highly unusual, and advantageous, market position: they are both the producers and the consumers of academic labor, but as producers, they have no financial stake in whether their product “sells”—that is, whether their graduates get jobs. Yes, a program’s prestige is related, in part, to its placement rate, but only in relative terms. In a normal industry, if no firm sells more than half of what it produces, then either everyone goes out of business or the industry consolidates. But in academia, if no one does better than 50 percent, then 50 percent is great. Programs have every incentive to keep prices low by maintaining the oversupply.”

Finally he concludes with an eye-opening but sadly accurate observation:

“How professors square their Jekyll-and-Hyde roles in the process—devoted teachers of individual students, co-managers of a system that exploits them as a group—I do not know. Denial, no doubt, along with the rationale that this is just the way it is, so what can you do?”

I am glad that somebody else perceives the problem the way that I do. At least, I now know that I am on the right track! Do any BioJobBlog readers have any suggestions, ideas or insights into how to fix this obviously broken system? 

Let me know!

Until next time...

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

 

What Exactly Is LinkedIn?

By now, many of you have received an invitation by e-mail to join someone’s LinkedIn network. While some of you may have heard of LinkedIn, you may not exactly be sure what it is and whether or not you ought to accept the invitation to join your colleague’s network. To that end, watching the video below (sponsored by LinkedIn) may help to answer some questions about the network and whether or not it may be right for you.

 

It is becoming increasingly obvious that participation at online social networking at sites like LinkedIn, BioCrowd, Twitter and others are necessary to land jobs in today’s competitive job market. Unfortunately, many scientists are still reluctant to join these networks to help to find jobs or advance their careers. Hopefully, this will change in the future as scientists begin to recognize the career benefits of online networking sites.

BTW, LinkedIn, which has 100 million users* and a presence in over 140 countries, is going public. It latest IPO price was today announced at $45 per share; the top of its expected price range! Other social media companies like GroupOn and Facebook are expected to issue IPOs later this year.

* In a previous iteration of this post, I mistakenly published that LinkedIn had over 200 million members. The actual number is about 100 million....Mea Culpa!

Until next time...

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

Addendum: LinkedIN successfully completed its IPO on Thursday. After opening at at $83 — up from its I.P.O. price of $45 — and rose as high as $122.70. The shares closed at $94.25, giving the company a market value of roughly $9 billion

 

The Life Sciences Industry Continues to Get Smaller

Shire, an Irish speciality pharma and rare diseases drug maker, today announced that it would purchase Connecticut-based Advanced BioHealing (AB) for $750 million in an all cash deal. 

The main reason for the deal was AB’s Dermograft, a regenerative bio-engineered skin substitute used for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Dermagraft currently has roughly a 5 percent share of the potential $3 billion slow-healing DFU market, approximately $146 million in US sales last year, and Shire says the potential for growth in the DFU market is considerable. Also, AB had finished enrolling patients into multinational trials to investigate Dermagraft for the treatment of venous leg ulcers. If all goes as planned, a regulatory filling in the USA for the new indication is planned for the first quarter of 2012.

Shire tendered its offer to purchase Advanced BioHealing one day before the company was to launch an initial public offering of 13.4 million shares priced from $14 to $16. The IPO would have raised over $200 million and the company would have been valued at around $630 million. The deal was a strategic move for Shire that wants to expand its product offerings in the speciality pharma sector. It isn’t clear whether the acquisition will result in layoffs at AB. Unfortunately, all cash transaction typically do not bode well for the company this is being acquired.

In other news, Takeda, after denying reports earlier in the week that it intended to purchase Nycomed for $12.0 billion is expected to announce the deal today.

Until next time...

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

Addendum: At the press conference this afternoon, Takeda tersely stated that it had not agree to purchase Switzerland's Nycomed. Stay tuned for the next installment of the saga!

Addendum to the Addendum: Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Nycomed  jointly announced today that Takeda has reached an agreement with the shareholders of Nycomed in which Takeda will acquire the Zurich-headquartered company for $13.6 billion ( 9.6 billion Euro) on a cash-free, debt-free basis. The boards of directors of each company unanimously approved the transaction which is expected to be completed within 90 to 120 days, making it a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda, subject to antitrust clearance. The purchase would exclude Nycomed's U.S. dermatology business.

Vaccines: The New Blockbusters?

Not too long ago, the mere mention of the word “vaccine” caused most big pharma executives to break out into a cold sweat. Once derided as low margin products and potential market busters—once most populations are immunized the incidence of disease declines and the market begins to falter—vaccines, primarily pediatric ones, have made a huge comeback over the last five years. 

One of the main reasons for the resurgence of the vaccine industry, was passage of US legislation that better-defined the legal obligations of vaccine makers and inclusion in the legislation of provisions that cap the size of awards made to persons claiming injury after vaccination. Another factor that contributed to the growing popularity of vaccines was emergence of the middle class in vast and concomitant improves in the healthcare systems of emerging markets that include South America, Asia and Africa. Unlike the mature vaccine markets in the US, Europe and Japan (because of low birthrates), the Asian, Latin American and African markets are poised for explosive growth over the next two decades.

In a recent article entitled “Vaccines-The Sustainable Blockbuster Business” Frost and Sullivan’s Senior Healthcare Analyst Barath Shankar Subramanian provides some interesting and insightful factoids about the vaccine industry. They are:

Pediatric vaccines are leading adult vaccines and represent the fastest growing segment of the global vaccine market

Europe is the world’s leading vaccine producer with over 90% of total production

The top five vaccine manufacturers (all big pharma companies) produce more than four-fifths of global vaccine revenues while other manufacturers (approximately 40) account for only one-fifth.

The North American market accounts for over 50 percent of the total spend on vaccines

North America and Europe supply only 14 percent of the world’s vaccine demand; the rest is met by suppliers in developing markets

Government investment, not-for-profit spending and industry alliances/ partnerships, in addition to private R&D spending, are helping to drive the current resurgence of the global vaccine industry

At present, there no fewer than 80 new candidates in late stage clinical development. Further, almost 40 per cent of the new vaccine candidates are for indications that currently have no vaccines on the market.  Finally, improvements in vaccine delivery are helping to drive the improved uptake of vaccines. For example, aerosols, transdermal skin patches, oral drops and even pills—all designed to eliminate needles and improve patient compliance and overcome cold chain supply issues are currently being developed.

From a business perspective—as far as sustainable markets go—the pediatric segment of the vaccine market is a clear winner. Currently, the leading global causes of vaccine-preventable, deaths for children under five include: pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, measles, Hemophilus influenzae b (Hib) infections, pertussis and tetanus. To that end, it is likely that governments in emerging markets will continue to add existing and new vaccines to government-mandated immunization programs. This is almost certain to propel the vaccine market to new heights over the next 10 years or more.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (think biologics!)

 

Pharma and Biotech Job Watch

Merck & Co, which yesterday completed its $430 million acquisition of Inspire Pharmaceuticals, announced that it intends to shut down Inspire’s headquarters in Raleigh, NC. According to a Merck spokesperson closure of the former Inspire site will occur before the end of the year and their will be job losses. However, it is not clear at present how many jobs will be lost but both executive and workforce positions are on the chopping block. 

Inspire was founded at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill in1995 and went public in 2000. The company employed 240 workers at the beginning of 2011 but it cut 27 percent of its workforce in February after an experimental treatment for cystic fibrosis failed in clinical trials. Merck’s acquisition of Inspire gives the company AzaSite an approved treatment for pink eye and a treatment for dry that is approved in Japan (the drug failed to gain US regulatory approval).

In other industry news, Connecticut-based Alexion announced that it will add 20,000 sq feet of laboratory and office space to its Smithfield, RI location. The company currently employs 125 workers and plans to expand its workforce by 35 percent in the next year or so. Alexion has one approved prescription medication called Soliris, the only approved therapy for persons with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglboinuria (PNH) an orphan indication.

Until next time...

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

 

Antibiotic Revenues and Antibacterial Drug Discovery Research Are Declining

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)

 

Looking Back: The Largest Big Pharma Drug Settlements in the Past Two Years

Big pharma continues to lament the increased scrutiny being imposed on it by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Like it or not, the agency’s directive is to insure that the drugs that it approves are safe and effective for the American public. And, for the most part, the agency does its job and frequently catches companies that attempt to break the rules.

To that end, an article that appeared in FiercePharma last October noted that eleven big pharma companies had paid a total of over $6.0 billion in fines to the US government over the last two years or so. The biggest losers include Eli Lilly paid over $1.4 billion in fines because of alleged illegal marketing of its anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa and Pfizer which paid $2.3 billion for marketing missteps with three drugs including Bextra (pain), Geodon (schizophrenia) , Lyrica (neuropathic pain) and Zyvox (antibiotic). 

More recently, GlaxoSmithKline agreed to pay $750 million fine in a whistle blower lawsuit that alleged that the company had sold "adulterated products" manufactured in a Cidra Puerto Rico production facility. Also, the company announced last February that it intends to pay $3.4 billion to settle lawsuits alleging the improper promotion and sale of several of its products including the blockbuster diabetes drug Avandia and Paxil (depression).

The article also included a timeline of some of the other major settlements that have recently taken place (seen below)

Novartis
With: U.S. Attorney's office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
When: Sept. 30, 2010
Infraction: Novartis agreed to a $422.5 million settlement with the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for its off-label promotion of Trileptal and other allegations against Diovan, Exforge, Sandostatin, Tekturna and Zelnorm.

Forest Labs
With: Dept. of Justice
When: Sept. 15, 2010
Infraction: After marketing Levothroid, an unapproved thyroid drug, Forest Labs received its penalty, to the tune of $313 million. The settlement also covered Forest's off-label use of Celexa for children's use.

Allergan
With: Dept. of Justice
When: Sept. 1, 2010
Infractions: Allergan's $600 million Department of Justice settlement was broken into two parts: $375 million in fines and $225 million in civil penalties, all of which stemmed from its off-label use of Botox for headaches, pain management and cerebral palsy.

Elan
With: U.S. Attorney's Office in Massachusetts
When: July 15, 2010
Infraction: The Irish drugmakers received its $203.5 million fine for its marketing tactics of Zonegran, an epilepsy drug. Also, the company's U.S. branch pled guilty to a misdemeanor and the company will enter into a corporate integrity agreement with the HHS Inspector General.

Johnson & Johnson
With: Department of Justice
When: April 29, 2010
Infraction: Though J&J's more infamous woes stem from its phantom recalls, two of the troubled drug maker’s subsidiaries received a $81 million penalty for off-label promotions of Topamax, an epilepsy drug.

AstraZeneca
With: U.S. Attorney's office in Philadelphia
When: April 27, 2010
Infraction: In the same week as the J&J settlement, AstraZeneca was hit with a $520 million penalty for its antipsychotic, Seroquel. The company misled doctors and patients about the drug's safety.

Despite concerted efforts by the US Food and Drug Agency to limit off-label promotion of prescription drugs, most pharma companies continue to see how far they can push the envelope before the agency catches up with them. Given the current budget woes facing FDA, don’t be surprised if the frequency of off label promotion and misrepresentation of prescriptions drugs continue to rise.

Until next time...

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

 

Unemployment Update: Almost 300,000 Pharma Jobs Lost Since 2000

Mathew Herper, who writes at the Forbes Blog, reported today that according to a report compiled by the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas, since 2000 the pharmaceutical industry cut 297,650 jobs. According to Herper “that is about as many people as currently work at the three largest drug makers — Pfizer, Merck, and GlaxoSmithKline — combined.” As he aptly points out “Many of those who were laid off were probably hired back by other drug makers. Some folks have probably been laid off more than once. It’s also worth noting that big mergers are one reason for the cuts.”

Nevertheless, the number of lost jobs is staggering. Interestingly, while almost 300,000 jobs have been lost in the last decade, a majority of the cuts (234,814) have taken place over the past six years (see below).   It is not clear from the report whether or not these numbers include the numbers of jobs lost by the aggregate life sciences industry (including biotech and specialty pharma) or only by the pharmaceutical sector.    

Year No. Jobs Lost
2000   2,453
2001   4,736
2002 11,488
2003 28,519
2004 15,640
2005* 26,300
2006* 15,638
2007* 31,732
2008* 43,014
2009* 61,109
2010* 53,636
2011 (to date)   3,387
TOTAL 297,650

   Source: Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. © (via the Forbes Blog)

With mergers on the way and more jobs being outsourced to Asia and elsewhere, don’t be surprised if the total number of layoffs continues to grow.

Until next time

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

 

Is Latin American The Next Big Market?

While India and China have been getting much of the attention and press over the past few years, Latin America is quietly become a market to watch for the life sciences industry.  According to industry analysts,the Brazilian pharmaceutical market has been growing at a rate of about 12 percent per year and is expected to be the world's fifth-largest pharmaceutical market by 2015.

A number of companies have been doing deal in Latin America mainly in Mexico and Brazil. Late last week, Amgen announced that it had purchased the privately-held Brazilian company Bergamo for about $215 million. As part of the transaction Amgen had reacquired marketing rights in the country to several Amgen products. Also, Amgen also agreed with Hypermarcas, a maker of personal hygiene products, to reacquire Brazilian rights to several products, including its Vectibix cancer drug.

Bergamo, which had $80 million in revenue last year, supplies medicines to the Brazilian hospital sector and has capabilities in oncology. Amgen, which is acting more and more like a pharmaceutical company rather than a biotechnology company, has clearly signaled its intention to take advantage of opportunities in emerging markets in BRIC (Brazil, China, India and China) counties.

Amgen has been struggling of late and its drug development pipeline, like many of its pharmaceutical rivals, has grown thin over the past decade.  Don't be surprised if Amgen is the next biotechnology company to be purchased by a big pharma company.  Merck's intention to enter into the biosimilar and biomanufacturing sectors suggest that Merck may be a likely suitor to gain control of the EPO and Neupogen franchises as well as Amgen's stake in the Enbrel market.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try Brazil)

 

The Job Cuts Keep On Coming at Big Pharma Companies

The French drug maker Sanofi-Aventis continues to reorganize and slash jobs in anticipation of its acquisition of Genzyme. Today the company disclosed that it would shed another 700 jobs from its European operations. The job cuts come amid the company’s reorganization of its units in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Portugal Spain, Holland, the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom (basically the entire EU).  The goal is to consolidate and reorganize the 30 European subsidiaries into only 10.

In other news, the Japanese drug maker Eisai announced that it plans on cutting 600 jobs or 20 percent of its US workforce. This announcement comes only one week after the company disclosed that it would trim 900 jobs in the next five years from European and Japanese operations. Impending generic competition for Eisai blockbuster treatment for Alzheimer’s disease, Aricept, is largely responsible for the layoffs. Like most other big pharmaceutical companies there aren’t enough drugs in development pipelines to offset the loss of revenue from generic encroachment on blockbuster brands.

Until next time...

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

 

Why Is Video Not Catching On in the Life Sciences Industry?

While video may be losing some of its “newness" and cache in social media circles, it continues to grow and has become a mainstay of networking platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and of course YouTube!  Despite its popularity in most industries, the life sciences industry continues to eschew its use. The reasons for this are not clear but it is counter intuitive given the billions of dollars the pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies annually invest in direct-to-consumer advertising

Several big pharma companies, most notably Johnson & Johnson, have attempted to increase the use of video to connect with its stakeholders but its efforts haven’t yield much of an ROI. I suspect that most industry insiders will tell you that the main reason why video is not routinely used is the lack of regulatory guidelines guiding its use on social media platforms. While this is a facile explanation, the existing regulatory guidelines for direct-to-consumer television advertising certainly apply to video!

In a post today on the EyeonFDA blog, Mark Senak offers a variety of ways in which life sciences companies can leverage video to their advantage to promote good will among shareholders and stakeholders alike. His ideas make sense and are very much within the regulatory guidelines for direct-to-consumer advertising. Whether or not direct-to-consumer advertising is a good thing is a topic for another post!

Until next time...

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

 

What's Up With FDA Inspections Anyway?

BioJobBlog readers who understand Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMP) for pharmaceuticals and biologics know that the US Food and Drug administration is mandated to review approved drug manufacturing facilities once every two years. While this is the mandated inspection schedule, most industry insiders know that manufacturing plant inspections now take place once every three or more years. This has resulted because of an increased reliance by US drug makers on foreign manufacturing facilities to produce licensed pharmaceuticals and biologics, a lack of regulatory oversight by the agency during the Bush administrations and funding shortfalls that have resulted in a shortage of FDA inspectors.

Congress recently took the agency to task about a lack of oversight for food and drugs manufactured in foreign countries. In September, the Government Accountability offices reported that FDA inspects foreign drug facilities on average once every nine years as compared with every 30 months or more with US plants. To correct this, FDA announced that it aims to increase reliance on third party inspectors in other countries to maintain better oversight of ex-US manufacturing plants. In other words, it is less costly to train and work with inspectors already in foreign countries rather than send US inspectors overseas.

In a post last week on the Pharmalot Blog, Ed Silverman reported that Bloomberg News reviews almost 10,000 inspections at US manufacturing plants from 2000 until September 30, 2010. While the Bloomberg report did not provide details on the frequency and nature of violations uncovered at the inspections, the results of the reports were eye-opening. According to Ed:

“The FDA makes 0.9 visits, on average, to each facility each year, compared with 0.6 visits annually when George W. Bush was in the White House. Looked at another way, the agency NOW visits each of the 2,567 plants registered in the US almost once a year.”

Further he noted:

“Some of the biggest drugmakers do not have a good track record when it comes time for FDA inspectors to visit their plants. Overall, the FDA found violations at 54 percent of plants inspected last year, up 20 percent from a decade low in 2007, according to data obtained from the agency by Bloomberg News. And 80 drugmakers failed more than half of their inspections.”

So, which companies had the poorest inspection track records? Ed noted

“Abbott Labs failed 59 percent of 111 inspections; Pfizer flunked 57 percent of 202 inspections; Merck bombed out on 52 percent of 134 visits and Johnson & Johnson failed 48 percent of 161 inspections. By contrast, [generic drug manufacturer] Mylan passed 79 percent of 56 inspections!”

Republicans are threatening to slash FDA funding for US inspections mainly because the agency is focusing more on overseas manufacturers and suppliers. In response to the funding cut threats, the Obama Administration proposed that drug manufacturers whose production plants fail inspections would be required to pay fines of roughly $49,000. At present, there are no mandatory fines levied against drug makers that fail FDA inspection (the agency can and does impose fines if companies that fail inspections refuse or are reluctant to fix the problems that were uncovered).

I find it interesting that despite the numerous drug recalls and problems with drug safety of approved drugs over the past few years that the Republicans, could in good conscience, threaten to cut FDA funding to increase the frequency of inspections to bring them in line with the mandated once every two years rather than once every 2.5 to 3.0 years that has been the norm for the last decade.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

More Downsizing and Outsourcing at Big Pharma Companies

The Japanese drug maker Eisai, Co announced that it will cut at least 900 jobs over the next five years to improve operating margins to offset the impending lost of patent protection for Aricept its blockbuster Alzheimer’s  disease treatment. The company did not specify where the cuts would take place.

In other news, based Eli Lilly & Co announced plans to outsource its R&D bioanalytical functions to Advion Biosciences a contract research organization that is building new laboratories Lilly’s home town of Indianapolis, Indiana. Ithaca NY-based Advion is building a 22,000 sq ft facility that will focus on ADME and toxicology experiments that are required for new molecules to enter human clinical testing.

Advion offers a range of Good Laboratory Practice-compliant and discovery bioanalytical services, including liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) for determining small-molecule drugs, macromolecule therapies and biomarkers; immunoassay services; ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion) screening; cytochrome P450 inhibition and induction study support; metabolism profiling; metabolite identification; sample management; and sample storage.

According to a press release:

 “Lilly will transition its own drug discovery bioanalytical capabilities to Advion and will offer employees affected by the move the opportunity to join Advion. The new laboratory is expected to be fully operational by the end of May 2011.”

This is another example of big pharmaceutical companies exiting the R&D space. Because of the rampant downsizing and outsourcing of R&D functions to CROs, now could be one of the better times in years to start a biotech company. Big pharma is relying on starts up companies and academic laboratories to be the major source of new molecules that they develop. That said, the age of big “in-house” drug discovery operations at big pharmaceutical companies is drawing to an end. 

Until next time...

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

 

@AstraZenecaUS Pushes the Pharmaceutical Social Media Envelope

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!!!!!!!!

 

Like the US, Thousands of Pharma Jobs Are Lost in Canada

Little is published in the blogosphere about the life sciences industry in Canada. Because of this, many people think that Canadian scientists and other bioprofessionals may have fared better than their US counterparts. However, like the US, thousands of scientists and others have lost jobs throughout Canada during the almost three year global recession.

While the number of layed off employees is no where near the almost 200,000 American pharma employees who have lost their jobs over the past four years, over 3,600 Canadian pharmaceuticals employees lost jobs in the second half of 2010. Most of the jobs were lost in pharmaceutical manufacturing. Like the US, these jobs were mainly lost as a result of outsourcing and corporate downsizing because of escalating financial pressures. Despite this, government officials expect the Canadian life sciences industry to recover by 2015.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (Eh)

 

Reports of E-Mail Demise May be Greatly Exaggerated

ComScore, a company that tracks Internet traffic recently determined that the number of visitors to Web-based e-mail sites, like Gmail, Yahoo mail and others, declined roughly 5.9 per cent from November 2009 to November 2010. In November, 2009 160 million users used web-based e-mail platforms whereas only 153 million used those services. 

According to comScore, the decline represents the growing use of mobile e-mail devices like Blackberry and the iPhone which don’t require their users to log on to the Web to view messages. However, while the number of people who use mobile devices to check e-mail daily rose to 40 per cent, it isn’t clear whether or not the conclusions drawn by comScore are accurate. For example, I use Yahoo mail daily to check e-mail messages on my iPhone. Moreover, although Web-based e-mail use by persons aged 12 to 17 years dropped 24 percent over the past year, the number of users aged 55 years and older continues to rise. Finally, while my children aged 17, 15 and 12 prefer text and chat to e-mail they all still use web-based e-mail for formal communications with their teachers and older persons. I suspect that this is not very surprising to many BioJobBlog readers because the number of baby boomers (old fogies who are comfortable with e-mail) will continue to overshadow the number of Gen X and Gen Y persons for many years to come. Put simply, we boomers are still in control and will not relinquish it until we all die! And, once, we are gone, things are likely to change.

The point that I am trying to make is that while texting, Twitter and Facebook may be appropriate for informal communication among tweens, teenagers and young adults, e-mail is, and will continue to be, the major means of communication for business purposes. This is mainly because e-mail is much easier to monitor, capture, manage and oversee than texting, Twitter or Facebook. And, perhaps more importantly, unlike the previously mentioned “new” forms of communication, archived e-mail messages are now routinely used in American courts to adjudicate legal disputes that arise between individuals and companies. In other words, e-mail messages are now recognized as being part of the “official record” for legal and business purposes.

Coincidentally, on a college visit last week to a small liberal arts college, our undergraduate guide—a 20-something undergraduate communications and marketing major—quietly shared with me that she doesn’t get the whole Twitter, Facebook and texting “thing.” She said she regularly communicates with college administrators, her professors and most of her classmates via e-mail; mainly because the other forms of communication require immediate attention. And, if you are busy or have work to do or don’t want to talk to someone that can be troublesome. As far as she was concerned, e-mail was the best way to communicate. I am not sure whether or not she said what she did about e-mail for my sake, because during our conversation, she paused for a moment to read a text message from her friend admonishing her that she was late for a lunch date.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting.

 

BioCrowd Co-Founder, Cliff Mintz, Talks About Building Online Networks for Life Scientists and Physicians

Believe it or not, I was interviewed by Karl Schmieder of Bridge 6, a digital healthcare marketing firm about the genesis of BioCrowd and why online networking is important for bioprofessionals and healthcare providers. This is a first for me and it signals that online networking for life scientists and other bioprofessionals may actually be starting to catch on. You can read the entire interview by clicking here.

While most other sites like Benchfly, Epernicus, Labspaces, ResearchGate and others cater almost exclusively to scientists, BioCrowd was created as an online networking and career development site for ALL bioprofessionals including those involved with marketing, manufacturing, publishing, writing, fun raising etc. We want prospective BioCrowd members to think of the community as a “one-stop-shopping” site for life sciences professionals who want to network, advance a career or even start  up a biotechnology company! Check us out!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (I hope to see you at BioCrowd!)

 

Employment Update: Who Is Hiring and Who Is Not!

While US unemployment continues to hover around 9.4 percent, there appears to be a steady increase in the number of companies that are posting ads on job boards like Simply Hired and Indeed.com. According to an article in the NY Times “A Sign of Hope for More Hiring” job postings at Simple Hired roe over 50 percent last year over 2009 and increased almost 70 percent in December 2010 as compared with December 2009.

The situation at Indeed.com, a major competitor of Simply Hired, appears to be similar. That is, there has been a substantial and continual increase in the number companies posting jobs on the Indeed.com website.

However, while this is great news, it isn’t exactly clear what the increased job postings mean. For example, some industries are hiring at a greater rate than others (see below).

Not surprisingly, the greatest increases are occurring in some of the industries that were hit hardest by the recession, e.g. transportation, automotive, legal, manufacturing and financial services. Hiring in healthcare, technology and education remains steady and respectable. On the other hand, two industries that have actually lost ground are media and the military. For a more comprehensive analysis check out the white paper on 2010 Employment Trends created by Simply Hired. Although things look like they may be picking up, the sad reality is that workers who have been unemployed for months have a much harder time landing new jobs as compared with those who have been unemployed for weeks. Unfortunately, many of the workers that make up the 9.4 percent unemployed, have been out of work for six months or more. Further, the availability of jobs will vary by industry and perhaps more importantly geography. Data from Simply Hired suggests that employment opportunities are greater in Washington, D.C, Baltimore, Boston, Milwaukee, Minneapolis/St Paul, San Francisco and Denver as compared with Miami, Detroit, Sacramento and LA. The availability of healthcare jobs appears to be greatest in San Francisco and San Antonio. Interestingly, many of the new job postings are coming from smaller companies rather than those that constitute the Fortune 500 list. This means that former corporate employees may want to focus their job searches on smaller companies rather than continue to seek employment at big name companies.

Despite these encouraging and optimistic signs, the road ahead for most R&D scientists and pharmaceutical sales reps looks pretty bleak. That said, now may be a good time to consider alternate career options or possibly going back to school for retraining. To that end, data from Indeed.com suggests that learning HTML 5, the new, highly anticipated Web development language which may make Flash obsolete, may be the ticket to guaranteed employment. Knowledge of HTML 5 in addition to experience with mobile apps, the Android operating system and Twitter skills that are highly coveted by employers in many industries. Finally, if more school or retraining is not in your future, you may want to consider switching industries, moving to a different type of job in your discipline or, if possible, relocating!

Until next time...

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

 

Online Career Resources Sites for Life Scientists and Other Bioprofessionals

Believe it or not, employment opportunities are looking better in the life sciences industry. While this may be good news for some, the need for R&D scientists and sales representatives in the US is dwindling. The high cost and low ROI for R&D at most major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies has forced life sciences executives to outsource many R&D functions that previously had been performed in house. Likewise, the inability of companies to bring novel, new medicines to market has reduced the need for pharmaceutical companies to maintain large sales forces. Put simply, there aren’t enough drugs to be sold to warrant large numbers of sales people trying to sell them! Given this backdrop, now may be a good time for bioprofessionals in these areas to consider new job opportunities and possibly new career paths. To that end, this post contains information about several biocareer developments sites (created by me) that may be helpful to bioprofessionals looking for work or new careers. 

BioCrowd

BioCrowd, created two years ago by Clifford Mintz and Vincent Racaniello, is an online networking site for scientists and other life sciences professionals. Built on a flexible and highly interactive social networking platform, BioCrowd was designed to foster scientific and business relationships between its members. While science is the main driver of our community, it takes a host of other bioprofessionals in addition to scientists to create successful life sciences ventures. To that end, BioCrowd provides its members with immediate access to world class academic researchers, industrial scientists, consultants, recruiters, venture capitalists and other life sciences professionals. 

Our goal is to provide a socially-interactive “one-stop-shopping” solution for bioprofessionals who are interested in advancing their careers or seeking new business opportunities in the life sciences industry.

BioJobBlog

BioJobBlog was created four years ago and focuses on training and career development issues that are facing scientists and other bioprofessionals. The blog offers career development ideas and advice for bioprofessionals and also provides insights into hot topics and debates taking place in the life sciences industry.

Its founder, Clifford Mintz, started the blog because of the career difficulties he faced while making the transition from an academic scientist to freelance science writer. Cliff hopes that by sharing his experiences with others they may be able to more easily navigate their own career paths which can be difficult, frustrating and emotionally- draining!

The BioJobCenter

The BioJob Center offers both job seekers and employers ‘real time,’ current job listings, job application tracking, and e-mail job alerts. Job seekers can join for free and search for jobs (based on job title and/or location) and directly apply for them from the job center.
Employers, for a fee, can list job openings; advertise jobs; call out ‘hot jobs’ or search candidate resume databases. Jobs posted to the BioJob Center are also simultaneously listed on other job sites including www.JobJobHealth.com and Twitter Jobs.

While this is not close to being a comprehensive list of biocareer development sites out there, I can safely say that the advice and content on these sites is relevant and sound.

Until next time...

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

 

Generic Giant Teva to Lay Off 200 Workers in California

Layoffs at big pharma companies have become commonplace but downsizing at generic manufacturers? Aren’t generic drugs sales exploding through the roof? And, aren’t all major pharmaceutical companies facing patent cliffs responsible for the massive downsizing that has taken place over the past four years? Teva executives apparently didn’t get that memo and announced today that the company will lay off 200 employees at its Irvine, CA manufacturing facility. Of the 200, 195 will lose their jobs by February 6, 2011.

This is the second round of layoffs at the manufacturing facility that Teva acquired after purchasing biosimilar manufacturer Sicor Inc., in 2003 for $3.4 billion. Last July, 70 jobs were eliminated at the plant which previously manufactured Propofol, the powerful sedative implicated in Michael Jackson’s death. Teva has since discontinued production of the drug because of the drug because it was hard to manufacture and that the company got little or no profit from it.

The company had to halted production and recalled some Propofol in 2009 after 41 patients were sickened with flu-like symptoms. The problem resulted from elevated endotoxin levels found in some vials of the sedative. Several lawsuits also were filed over the drug.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Merck Cuts Sales Force in 2010 but Revenues Continue to Rise

In press release today, Merck & Co disclosed that it reduced the size of its global sales force by 12 percent in 2010. Ken Frazier, Merck’s newly appointed CEO, pointed out that cuts in sales force sizes in developed markets like the US and Europe reached almost 30 percent. Yet, despite these cuts, Merck reported that it was able to boost sales in its vaccine and pharmaceutical business units.

Merck, like most other big pharmaceutical companies, have drastically reduced the sizes of their sales forces in recent years. The cuts have been attributed to higher than expected product attrition rates, product recalls and changes in physician preferences. It appears that many physicians grew tired of repeated visits by multiple reps after they were no longer allowed to give gifts or buy lunches for physician office staff. Further, many industry analysts contend that the advent of web-based marketing, social media and medical reimbursement overhaul (doctors no longer have time for reps) have largely rendered most pharmaceutical sales reps obsolete!

Other factors contributing to the recent demise of pharma reps are thin drug development pipelines, tougher regulatory standards for drug approval and impending patent cliffs (generic encroachment) for many blockbuster small molecule drugs. Put simply, fewer drugs require fewer people to sell them.

I think the death knell for pharma reps may be a bit premature. Many physicians find that well trained and informed sales rep can be a great resource and helpful to their practices.  Nevertheless, looking on the bright side, there is a growing need for sales reps that possess the background and training to sell biotechnology products! That said, unemployed pharma reps may want to consider going back to school to get some biotechnology training. This training is frequently available at local community colleges and four year colleges and universities and online.

Until next time...

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

 

Pharma's Twitter KLOUT

Twitter, for all intents and purposes, is arguably the hottest new tool to hit the social media scene since well.....errrrrrr....Facebook (are there really any others?). That said, everyone who is anybody has jumped on the Twitter bandwagon whether or not using Twitter has any positive or negative effects for its users. Nevertheless, insightful social media analysts like Mark Senak, author of the fabulous EyeonFDA blog, frequently attempt to assess the overall effectiveness of social media tools like Twitter on specific industries—in this case, the life sciences industry.

To make sense of the relative effectiveness (influence) of Twitter use by life sciences companies, Mark used a Twitter and Facebook assessment tool known as KLOUT.  KLOUT generates a “score” for individual Twitter feeds based on a combination of 35 different variables. The resultant scores fall into a range from 1-100 with a higher score indicating a wider range of influence. 

Not surprisingly, Mark’s analysis revealed that Twitter feeds sponsored by Roche (Roche News, 52), Novartis (Novartis, 52) and Pfizer (Pfizer News, 51), three of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies had the most KLOUT. Not far behind were Lilly (Lillypad, 47), Pfizer (PfizerMexico), AstraZeneca (AstraZeneca, 45) and Amgen (Amgen, 44). Other companies that warrant honorable mention include: Genentech (GenentechNews, 40), Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMSNews, 40), Johnson & Johnson (JNJStories, 40) and Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VertexPharma, 39).

Interestingly, many companies sponsor multiple Twitter feeds. For example, Sanofi Aventis AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis have five, JNJ has 4 and Roche, Baxter and Amgen have 3. It isn’t clear to me why companies would want to have more than one Twitter feed; doesn’t that dilute corporate messaging? But, then again, what do I know?  I am not a marketing or PR guy!

So, what does this all mean? As far as I can tell—not much! The only conclusion that I can draw from all of this is that Twitter, the most recent successful addition to the social media armamentarium, is no longer new but here to stay!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!

 

Study Finds Pharma Wrongdoing on the Rise

In a first-of-its-kind study, researchers at the Public Citizen’s Health Research Group tracked the civil and criminal financial penalties levied against the pharmaceutical industry for wrongdoing over the past 20 years. 

The main findings of the study revealed:

  1. Of the 165 settlements comprising $19.8 billion in penalties during this 20-year interval, 73 percent of the settlements (121) and 75 percent of the penalties ($14.8 billion) have occurred in just the past five years (2006-2010).
  2. Four companies (GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Schering-Plough) accounted for more than half (53 percent or $10.5 billion) of all financial penalties imposed over the past two decades. These leading violators were among the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies.
  3. The practice of illegal off-label promotion of pharmaceuticals has been responsible for the largest amount of financial penalties levied by the federal government over the past 20 years. This practice can be prosecuted as a criminal offense because of the potential for serious adverse health effects in patients from such activities.
  4. Deliberately overcharging state health programs, mainly Medicaid fraud, has been the most common violation against state governments and is responsible for the largest amount of financial penalties levied by these governments. This type of violation is also the main factor in the considerable increase in state settlements with pharmaceutical companies over time.
  5. Former pharmaceutical company employees and other “whistleblowers” have been instrumental in bringing to light the most egregious violations and have been responsible for initiating the largest number of federal settlements over the past 10 years. From 1991 through 2000, qui tam (whistleblower) cases made up only 9 percent of payouts to the government, but from 2001 through 2010, they comprised 67 percent of total payouts.

The companies, their missteps and the fines imposed are shown below:

The authors conclude:

"Over the past two decades, especially during the past 10 years, there has been a marked increase in both the number of government settlements with pharmaceutical companies and the size of the accompanying financial penalties. Given the relatively small size of current financial penalties when compared to the perpetrating companies’ profits, both increased financial penalties and appropriate criminal prosecution of company leadership may provide a more effective deterrent to unlawful behavior by the pharmaceutical industry."

Interestingly, about a month ago officials at the US Food and Drug Administration signaled that were willing to prosecute company executives to the fullest extent possible (including criminal prosecution) to reduce the incidence of fraud, off-label marketing and manufacturing violations that have become commonplace in the pharmaceutical industry in the past five years.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

New Report Suggests that A Majority of Life Sciences Companies Will Take the Social Media Plunge!

A new report released by Deloitte LLP entitled “To Friend or Not? New Insights about Social Networks in the Life Sciences Industry” indicates that roughly 65 percent of survey life sciences company professionals say their companies use or plan on using social networks in some capacity at a corporate level. Interestingly, 35 percent of those surveyed have no plans to do so!

Survey respondents say the lack of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines, consumer privacy concerns and a lack of a clearly demonstrated return on investment are the top three hurdles to widespread adoption of social networking platforms.

Even after the FDA guidelines for social networking are issued (who knows when that will be?), more than half (53 percent) of respondents still expect a significant amount of confusion around how life sciences companies can engage with social networks. Forty-six of companies that already use social networking tools will continue to use them but will not increase investment until the FDA provides guidance.

More than one-third of respondents (38 percent) are waiting for the FDA to issue guidance before making any investment. Nearly three in 10 respondents (28 percent) said their companies are waiting to see what ROI other companies get. However, the majority (73 percent) expect the budget allocated for social networking will increase over the next three years.

Additional findings from the report that surveyed marketing/brand management professionals include:

  • Approximately 44 percent have an informal strategy for social networking that is not documented and/or fully supported by leadership, while 32 percent have no strategy at all.
  • Survey respondents use social networking to disseminate information (51 percent), proactively seek information (42 percent), or to react or respond to pertinent information posted on an online social network (23 percent).
  • One in five (20 percent) are indifferent to using social networking.

One of the authors of the study suggested that “Our survey findings demonstrate that the bulk of the use for social networking now is geared largely towards marketing. However, there are additional strategic applications beyond pure marketing still to evolve, such as conducting market research cheaper and faster; working with foundations to mobilize patients; improving peer-to-peer education through cost-effective medical education; determining the right patient reported outcomes; and providing data to help speed-up clinical trials.”

I have long contended that the least likely application of social media in the life sciences industry would be for promotional and marketing purposes. While this previously was a minority position, Jonathan Richmond, who authors the popular social media and marketing blog “Dose of Digital”, finally agreed with me in a recent post, entitled “Social Media is Not for Advertising Pharma Brands.”

Unfortunately, much of the early conversations surrounding the use of social media in the life sciences industry were promulgated by pharmaceutical marketing consultants and product brand managers. The early emphasis on promotional use caused many pharma executives to head for their command bunkers at the mere mention of social media (mainly because of its possible regulatory implications). Luckily, less financially-motivated persons began to join the conversation and successfully floated ideas about less regulatory risky uses of social media. Interestingly, the promotional use of social media in the life sciences industry is no longer the main topic of conversations at most pharma and social media conferences these days.

It appears that most life sciences companies are willing to concede that social media is not a fad and not going away anytime soon. As the old adage goes “You gotta be in it to win it.”

Until next time...

Good Lucking and Good Surfing!!!!!

 

Social Media and Pharma: An Update

What a difference six months can make in the fast moving world of the social web! At last May’s Advanced Learning Institute’s conference on “Social Media for Pharma” there was a lot of anxiety, hand wringing and concern about the future of social media in the life sciences industry. 

Things were much different at “Social Media for Pharma” (also sponsored by the Advance Learning Institute) held earlier this week in Manhattan. Like last May’s meeting, there was still much speculation about when the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may provide the much awaited regulatory guidance on the use of social media for promotional purposes in the pharmaceutical industry. And, despite a presentation by FDA representatives at the meeting—that somewhat paradoxically described how the agency was using social media tools like Twitter, YouTube and Facebook to better educate and inform the American public about its activities and services —there were no hints about when the agency may issuing that guidance. Nevertheless, the number of pharma and biotechnology companies that have decided to “take the plunge into the social media pool” has grown substantially since last May. In fact, I got the sense that many of the conference participants were beginning to believe that implementing social media strategies was possible even if the agency fails to issue the long awaited guidance!

Generally speaking, there was a growing consensus at the meeting that the use of social media for promotional purposes—specifically to bolster sales of approved and marketed drugs and devices—may not be its best use. Several presentations, most notably those offered by Justin Gardener and Lindsey Hart from Advanced BioHealing, Inc and Jenny Keeney from Astellas Pharma US, Inc showed how social media can be used by life sciences companies to improve healthcare outcomes for patients and promote science education to improve the public understanding of science. Nancy Buono Cartwright from Kaiser Permanente gave a great talk on how to use social media to enhance corporate communication and employee participation and retention. 

A panel discussion featuring Dennis Urbaniak, Sanofi Aventis, Cynthia Phillips, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc and Justin Gardner, Advanced BioHealing, Inc and lead by John Mack aka the Pharma Guy was insightful and extremely illuminating regarding pharma’s changing attitudes toward social media. All of the panelists agreed that the drug industry is in transition and that now may be the time to try new things to get back to addressing unmet medical and patient needs. More importantly, Dennis Urbaniak stressed that pharma must begin to listen to what patients and stakeholders want rather than dictating or imposing “its” ideas and products on them. And, that it is apparent that social media provides an ideal vehicle to accomplish that goal.

Finally, Doug Levy, a compliance lawyer and Executive Director of Communications and Public Affairs Columbia Medical Center, gave an inspiring talk on how social media is no different than traditional modes of communication and that best practices already exist whether or not FDA ever issues any additional guidance on the topic! It appears that it is no longer a question of “if” but “when” as pharma continues to warm to inevitability of social media.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting or Whatever Your SM Tool of Choice May Be

 

WikiLeaks, Pharma Manufacturing and US National Security

Ed Silverman, author of the fabulous Pharmalot Blog, showed his investigative reporting bona fides by revealing today that there may be a direct link between pharma manufacturing facilities, US national security and the brouhaha over WikiLeaks.

Ed uncovered a cable dated Feb. 18, 2009 from the US Secretary of State to all overseas diplomats that stated pharma facilities are vital to US national security and that “losing these facilities could critically impact the public health, economic security, and/or national and homeland security of the United States.”

The cable stressed that these facilities produce insulin, a variety of vaccines that protect against potentially devastating infectious agents and other medications and a vital part of the US National Infrastructure Protection Program. According to Ed’s post, the facilities mentioned in the cable are located all over the world and included companies such as Baxter, GlaxoSmithKline, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Genzyme, Novartis, IDT Biologika, Vetter Pharma, Roche, CSL Behring and Grifols. Interestingly, only two of the companies mentioned, Baxter and Genzyme, are US-owned companies. Go figure!!!!!!!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Be Alert (you never know who may be watching)

 

Pharmaceutical Job Cuts Exceed 50,000 in 2010

Despite signs earlier this summer that job cuts at pharmaceutical companies were beginning to slow, it appears that the number of jobs lost in 2010 may come close to the roughly 61,000 pharmaceutical jobs that were eliminated in 2009. This is based on quarterly Job-Cut Announcement Report published by the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas. 

In past month or so, two big pharma companies, Roche and Novartis, announced that there will be major corporate reorganizations and deep job cuts to reduce spending, increase profits and bolster flagging stock prices. 

While things appear to be improving in other parts of the economy, the life sciences industry has been devastated by massive job layoffs in the past three years. Although pharma executives publicly blame the downsizing on the recession, massive R&D units, thinning pipelines and a failure to obtain a sufficient ROI on the huge sums of money poured into new drug development over the past decade are the real reason for the blood letting. Unfortunately, the US job market for life scientists won’t be improving anytime soon; mainly because it is more cost effective for companies to perform R&D and clinical testing in the emerging markets of China, India, Brazil and Russia (BRIC).

The ability of life sciences companies to successfully perform these activities outside of the US is in large part due to the lack of interest by American students in science careers and misguided immigration policies that prevented talented US-trained foreign nationals from remaining in the US after completing their training. This allowed many foreign countries to achieve a critical mass of US-trained life scientists and provide Western life sciences companies with a highly trained and well equipped scientific workforce.

With the holidays approaching, now may be a good time for those of you who work or considering careers in the life sciences industry to re-evaluate or consider alternate career options for life scientists.

Until next time...

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

 

Despite Assertions to the Contrary Novartis Lays Off 1,400 Sales Reps

Despite public assertions made by Novartis a mere eight days ago that it would not be eliminating thousands of jobs, the company today announced that it was eliminating 1,400 sales reps. Roughly 1,150 jobs will be cut from its primary care division—which is being consolidated into three units from four in the US—and another 250 from psychiatric and neuroscience. No jobs will be eliminated from Novartis’ headquarters in Hanover, NJ. While the job cuts announced today were not in the thousands (almost) it isn’t clear whether or not more are to come.

According to a post on today’s Pharmalot blog:

"Novartis had attempted to dampen speculation that a huge bloodletting was imminent after Roche disclosed plans to axe 4,800 jobs worldwide (back story) and, in fact, Joe Jiminez, the CEO, had written on his internal blog that news reports about big layoffs were inaccurate. Technically, the Novartis reduction is not in the thousands, but the number is still large and, essentially, confirms concerns that have been expressed over the past month at CafePharma, the online forum where reps dish the dirt (look here)."

Don’t you just love the holidays?

Until next time...

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

 

Bayer to Cut 4,500 Jobs

The German drug maker Bayer today announced that it plans to eliminate 4,500 jobs by 2012. Of the 4,500 positions to be cut, roughly 1,700 will be eliminated in Germany. Interestingly, during the same period, Bayer plans on creating 2,500 new jobs in “emerging markets;” yet another sign that big pharma is betting on translating the explosive growth of these markets into large profits.

While pharma’s interest in emerging markets may be good for the workers who live in these regions, it has been disastrous for scientists and sales personnel in developed markets like the US and Europe. To date, almost 200,000 pharmaceutical and biotechnology employees have lost their jobs since 2007.

Until next time...

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

 

Despite Large Profits Big Pharma Continues to Shed Employees

The fiscal year at most life sciences companies is drawing to a close, new budgets are being crafted and the holiday season is almost upon us. In years past, this time of year typically meant that it was bonus time for most pharma workers. Sadly, over the past three years bonus time has been replaced by layoff time. And, unfortunately the upcoming holiday season may not be joyous for many Pfizer and Roche employees.

Yesterday, Pfizer indicated that it may lay off up to 11,700 more employees than the 19,500 it had announced in connection with the buyout last year of Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. While Pfizer confirmed that it would be reducing its worldwide work force by more than the originally expected 19,500 the exact number remains a mystery. However, a quarterly report filed Friday with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission stated that Pfizer has estimated termination costs for 46,600 employees, while only 33,400 workers had actually been laid off as of Oct. 3. This appears to suggest that the company plans to reduce its work force by 11,700 more than originally announced, given that Pfizer is only 1,500 positions away from fulfilling its job-elimination pledge related to the Wyeth merger.

The additional job cuts—if they are realized—would amount to about 10 percent of Pfizer’s worldwide work force. If a reduction of that magnitude were applied to Pfizer drug-research sites in Groton and New London, which currently employ nearly 5,000 workers, about 500 jobs would be lost. The company in January 2009 announced that cuts would total 15 percent of the combined Pfizer and Wyeth work force. At the time, the combined work force numbered about 130,000; the latest official figure places that number at 111,500.

In other news, Roche today announced plans to cut 4,800 jobs, or 6 percent of its worldwide workforce of 82,000. Today’s announcement confirms the news leak three months ago (reported by the Pharmalot Blog) which suggested that job cuts would be likely during the fall.

According to today’s press release, technical operations activities will be reorganized in California, Mannheim, Germany and various other sites, resulting in the elimination of 750 jobs. The company also intends to sell sites in Florence, South Carolina and Boulder, Colorado; shedding an additional 600 jobs. About 1,200 jobs will be cut in the North American commercial operations, mainly in Roche’s primary-care business, while 700 positions will be lost in commercial operations in Europe.

R&D will also be affected. The company will discontinue activities in research and early development in RNA interference in Kulmbach, Germany, Nutley, New Jersey, and Madison, Wisconsin. Also, there are plans to reorganize other operations at these sites which will eliminate another 600 jobs.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (are there any left?)!!!!

 

Move over China and India: Big Pharma Is Eyeing Brazil

Most major pharmaceutical companies left Brazil about 30 years ago. However, much has changed in the country over the past 30 years and most western pharmaceutical companies are rushing back into Brazil to expand their operations and make acquisitions. At the same time, many Brazilian drug makers are beginning to consolidate and spread abroad.

The exodus of multinational drug companies in the 1980s was prompted by high inflation, tough government-mandated price controls and the lack of strong intellectual property and patent laws. Over the past 20 years Brazil has become a leader in agricultural technologies and made substantial investments into biotechnology. Along with these gains, patent rules and regulatory rules for pharmaceuticals and generics have become much stricter; making Brazil much more attractive to most major pharmaceutical manufacturers as growth of established markets continues to slow and need to increase sales in developing markets is critical. At present, Brazil is the eight largest eighth-largest drug markets in the world by sales. Much of this growth has been spurred by the rapid growth of the middle class (remarkably without reimbursement from state or private health insurance).

Some of the drug makers that have already invested in Brazil include Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer and Astra Zeneca. Novo Nordisk was an early entrant with its purchase in 2001 of Biobrás, a large insulin production plant outside São Paulo. Last year, Sanofi-Aventis acquired Medley, growing its portfolio of over-the-counter and branded products to complement its own offerings. Last month, Pfizer bought 40 per cent of Teuto, another generics business; other US, European and Japanese companies are continuing to study the Brazilian market closely.

While many western companies have gained a foothold in Brazil through M &A activity, others are attempting to develop their own internal presence.  Astra Zeneca, for example, is preparing for a launch of a series of both branded and generic products in the country.

In addition to the growing interest of multinational companies, some of Brazil’s domestic drug makers have been active. For example, Aché, a family-owned group and one of Brazil’s largest branded generics producers, has made smaller domestic acquisitions, and was considering buying Medley. The company has also begun forging alliances across Latin America, while its rival Eurofarma earlier this year bought Laboratorios Gautier in Uruguay, as the groups seek economies of scale in manufacturing and sales across the region. Even Farmaguinhos, the state-owned Brazilian drug company, has been collaborating with the African nation Mozambique.

Although the Brazilian government has made sizeable investments into research units such as the Butantan Institute in São Paulo and Oswaldo Cruz in Rio de Janeiro, the Brazilian drug industry is still in its infancy. The question is whether or not domestic drug makers will be able to meet demand before they are acquired by foreign companies interested in making inroads into Brazil’s burgeon drug market.

Until next time….

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

 

The BioCon-Pfizer Deal: Pfizer Embraces Biosimilars?

Biocon, one of India’s leading biopharmaceutical companies today announced that they have entered into a strategic global agreement for the worldwide commercialization of Biocon's biosimilar versions of Insulin and Insulin analog products:  Recombinant Human Insulin, Glargine, Aspart and Lispro.  

As part of the deal, Pfizer will have exclusive rights to commercialize these products globally, with certain exceptions, including co-exclusive rights for all of the products with Biocon in Germany, India and Malaysia.  

Biocon will continue to assume responsibility of clinical development, manufacture and regulatory approval of these products in various geographical regions and countries. Biocon's recombinant human insulin formulations are approved in 27 countries in developing markets, and commercialized in 23. Glargine’s first market was India where it was recently launched.  

Under the terms of the agreement, Pfizer will make upfront payments totaling $200 million.  Biocon is also eligible to receive additional development and regulatory milestone payments of up to $150 million and will receive additional payments linked to Pfizer's sales of its four Insulin biosimilar products across global markets.

While both Biocon and Pfizer are pushing the biosimilar aspect of the deal, it is important to point out that recombinant insulin are approved as “drugs” not biologics in the US. Consequently, these products are not true biosimilars and qualify for ANDA approval in the US. That said, it is intriguing that Pfizer is willing to be portrayed as a company that endorses the use of biosimilar medicines. Interestingly, however, there is still no regulatory approval for biosimilars in the US. And, despite public assertions to the contrary, most major pharmaceutical and big biotech companies are fiercely opposed to the introduction of biosimilars to the US. To that end, the current biosimilar legislation recently approved by Congress will prohibit the US introduction of biosimilars until approximately 2020.  

To date, more than 10 biosimilars have received marketing authorization in the EU and other Western markets. Europe approved a regulatory pathway for approval of biosimilars in 2004. Biosimilars have been sold in the so-call gray, unregulated markets in Asia, South America and elsewhere for the past decade.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try India, they are hiring)

 

More Facebook Advice for Jobseekers

There is no question that Facebook is the de facto social network that almost everyone uses. It has become an important source of personal information and is routinely used by professional recruiters and corporate hiring managers to identify right-fit job candidates.

However, there are more nefarious individuals in the ether who may mine your social media data to steal your identity or burglarize your home.

According to Credit.com it is not a good idea to post your address online or your mother’s maiden name (the answer to security questions on many websites). Also the folks at Identify Theft 911 recommend that you don’t add status updates to your Facebook page announcing to the world that you are away from your home or on vacation! Also, they recommend not using applications on social networking sites quizzes, which could expose personal information to the applications’ developer.

Finally, it is not a good idea to mention on Facebook or other social media sites where you were born or security question clues like the names of your favorite song, your best friend or your first pet.

While all of these recommendations may seem obvious, it is very easy to divulge personal information when updating Facebook or tweeting away on Twitter. Unfortunately, there are bad people out there who are willing to exploit others any way they can for financial gain.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting (be careful out there!)

Big Pharma Merger-Mania Continues at a Brisk Pace

I am certain that many of you may have noticed that the size of the life sciences industry is shrinking at an unprecedented rate. Big pharma companies flush with cash, near- empty pipelines and impending patent cliffs have embarked on a buying spree that is likely to continue for next years (or at least until the economy shows clear signs of resuscitation). Pfizer’s impending acquisition of King Pharmaceuticals is just another transaction in a long list of M&A deals that have occurred over the past three years.                             

According to an article in today’s NY Times, roughly $42.2 billion worth of pharma deals have been transacted so far this year. That number is close to the $45.8 billion in M&A transactions announced by the same time last year (excluding Pfizer’s acquisition of Wyeth and Merck’s purchase of Schering Plough). Unfortunately, these mega-merger deals almost always result in massive layoffs in the industry.

While blockbuster mergers may not be good for pharmaceutical employees, the behind the scenes players—investment bankers, brokers, advisers and consultants—make out extremely well. For example, according to an article in Pharmaceutical Technology Europe, over a three month period in 2009 pharmaceutical company merger and acquisition activities generated $500 million in advisory fees for investment bankers. Clearly, mergers and acquisitions are in the best interest of company executives and the investment bankers not pharmaceutical employees.

There is no question that the recession and the down economy are driving much of the M&A activity in the life sciences sector. And, industry consolation is to be expected during challenging economic times. However, while M&A may be in the best interest of pharma company shareholders in the short term, I don’t think it will help to insure American competitiveness and innovation in the life sciences over the long term. 

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

FDA Update: Product Recalls, Social Media and Biosimilar Guidelines

Whether you like President Obama or not, the changes he made in the leadership at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is beginning to yield results. After just two years, the agency is well on its way to modernization and overcoming its descent into the dark ages during the failed Bush Administration.

Mark Senak, the intrepid author of the EyeonFDA blog has been assiduously following and blogging about many of the new things going on at the agency. First, in a post a last week, Mark noted that FDA has updated its website and created a product recall page that collects recall information on all of the products that it regulates and deposited it in an easy to find product recall page. With product recalls in the food and life sciences industry increasing in frequency, this page will help to alert consumers about tainted products before learning of them on the nightly news. 

Second, Mark points out that FDA has finally entered the 21st century and is now fully engaged in social media.

“FDA begins to join the 21st Century launching a Facebook page that has been long anticipated on this blog. FDA has not completed the Social Media Quadrant - (1) a blog, (2) several twitter feeds (3) a YouTube channel, and (4) a Facebook page.  And as added good measure, the agency opened a Flickr page.  The agency is now fully engaged in activities that many in the industry it regulates think is forbidden them.... And the beat goes on.”

Finally, earlier this week FDA announced that it would hold long-awaited public hearings to get input on proposed biosimilar regulatory guidance. As Mark duly notes, this process is likely to be contentious and protracted.    

"The FDA has set November 2-3 for a meeting to get input on a wide span of questions regarding the development of a regulatory pathway for biosimilars.  The scope of the questions is demonstrative of the number of outstanding issues the agency faces and will likely result in a protracted process. "

Central to the debate (and ultimate success of biosimilars) is the question of interchangeability and substitution of name brand products with biosimilar molecules. According to Mark, the agency will focus on the following questions

"What factors should the agency consider in determining whether a proposed interchangeable biological product can be "expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient?"

"What factors should the agency consider in evaluating the potential risk related to alternating or switching between use of the proposed interchangeable biological product and the reference product or among interchangeable biological products?"

What has become patently obvious to many of us who have been following the debate over the last decade is that unless biosimilars are interchangeable or substitutable for brand name biologics, the commercial success of the biosimilar industry may be in serious jeopardy. Put simply, there is no question that safe and effective biosimilars can be manufactured; the real question is whether or not physicians will prescribe biosimilar products if they are required to be branded by regulatory agencies. This is because physicians are reluctant to switch patients to new biologic products if a patient is doing well on a currently prescribed regimen. Since most physicians pay little attention to drug pricing, it is highly unlikely that they will switch a patient to product simply because there may be a 20 percent reduction in drug price. And, unless biosimilar products are deemed interchangeable with their branded counterparts, pharmacists (based on insurance formularies) will not be able to offer patients a generic equivalent of a name brand biologics. 

With the cost of biologic treatments skyrocketing, it will be interesting to see what the agency will do with this question.

Until next time...

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

 

Big Pharma Continues to Shed Large Numbers of Jobs

While a report released today indicated that the pharmaceutical market is expected to grow to about $800 billion by 2011—a 5 to 7 percent increase—pharmaceutical companies shed another 6,069 jobs in September according to the outsourcing firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. This is compared to only 200 pharmaceutical employees who were given pink slips in August. Despite a lull this summer, it appears that pharma companies are ramping up again to layoff large numbers of employees by year’s end.

Previously, industry analysts were predicting that job losses in the pharmaceutical sector would be less than last year when 58,583 employees were shown the door. However, at the current pace—43,334 jobs lost so far—the total number of pharma jobs lost in 2010 may match or surpass the losses in 2009. This is because pharma budgets for the upcoming fiscal year are prepared in the fall and the real bottom lines are not known until the holiday season is upon us. Consequently, pharma has a nasty habit of announcing layoffs during the holiday season (nice huh?)

To date, Abbott Laboratories, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Lundbeck, Lonza, and Johnson & Johnson have all announced plans to reorganize and downsize. It is anyone’s guess which companies may follow suit.

Unfortunately, it is tough to be in the life sciences business these days; unless of course you live in China, India, Eastern Europe and Latin America! Alternatively, it may not be a bad idea to relocate!

Until next time...

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

 

Suggestions That Can Improve the Quality of Your Resume

I found an article on the Investopedia.com website that provides some useful tips and ideas on how to improve your resume quality and increase the likelihood of a face-to-face job interview.  Some may be obvious while others are not. 

Nevertheless, they are worth reviewing and using if they may sense to you

1. References Upon Request

There is no need to waste valuable resume space on this outdated section. Employers assume that you will provide references if asked. Instead, keep a separate page with the names and contact information of your references ready to supply to the employer once you have advanced in the interview process.

2. One Resume Fits All

While it is smart to keep a master resume on file, you need to customize it to fit each job for which you apply. Job-seekers who take the time to tailor their resume to the employer's needs will stand out from the pack. Eliminate the details that don't apply to the position and emphasize the ones that make you look the most qualified. It might take a little extra time to apply using this technique, but it will be worth it when your interview offers increase.

3. Objective Statement

The professional summary or profile has replaced the objective statement. Employers are focused on what candidates can do for them, not what the business can do for the candidate. You will sell yourself better with a concise bulleted list of the qualifications and accomplishments that make you a match for the position.

4. Single-Page Resume

One of the most touted resume rules is that the document must be one page. Many people will go to extremes to follow this command, resulting in tiny, unreadable font sizes just to avoid having a resume that extends onto the second page.

Unless you are a newcomer to the job market, it is entirely possible that you'll need more than a page to adequately showcase your skills and qualifications. If you have enough job experience that fits the position, it is acceptable to extend your resume length to two pages. Keep your resume succinct and relevant, but don't go under a 10-pt. font size.

5. Lack of Social Networking

Websites such as Facebook and Twitter might be considered distractions in the workplace, but they can be an asset on a resume. Employers want to know that applicants are up-to-date with current technology and communication trends. Links to a professional online portfolio, blog or LinkedIn page should be included in your resume header. There is a good chance that employers will do an internet search to find out more about potential employees, so make sure that all of your social networking profiles project a professional image.

6. Too Much Information

It is not necessary to give your life story on a resume. In fact, providing an employer with too much information can be detrimental to your chances of employment. Delete information about where and when you graduated high school. Ditch irrelevant jobs from 15 years ago. Although it was standard practice in some industries years ago, it is now inappropriate to include personal details in a resume such as information about your hobbies, religion, age and family status. Not only does it look unprofessional, but that information could be used to discriminate against you.

An employer will ask if they want to know why you left previous positions, so don't mention it on your resume. The rule of thumb is to pare down your resume to only include things that show why you are the perfect fit for the specific position for which you are applying.

7. Outdated Terminology and Skills

Skills in obsolete computer software and systems should be removed from your resume. Technical experience is critical in nearly every industry and employers often use technology keywords to find resumes in electronic databases. Listing basic computer skills such as word processing and using an internet browser is not recommended because employers will assume that you have those proficiencies. The job description is the best guide to determine the terminology and technology skills that should show up on your resume.

While I am not totally “down” with the inclusion of social media links on a resume, it’s totally up to you! That said, if you choose to take her advice, I highly recommend that you review all of your online profiles and sanitize them.

Until next time...

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

 

Off Label Marketing by Pharmaceutical Companies was Pervasive in the early 2000s

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!!!!

 

A New Wrinkle to Difficult Interviewing Questions

With unemployment high and the economy showing little sign of improvement, finding a new job has become increasingly challenging. And, not surprisingly, the types of interview questions that hiring managers are beginning to ask prospective job candidates are becoming more intricate and complex. I found interesting examples of this at the  “You’re the Boss” blog sponsored by the New York Times.

In the article, a person who owns a small retail business revealed that he always asks job candidates to describe their most stressful customer experience in previous jobs. The question helps him to ascertain how prospective new employees might cope with difficult situations. Also, it tends to reveals whether or not they speak honestly about their own actions and what their attitudes may be towards customers. Another question that he frequently asks is “Why did you really leave your last job? Were you fired? Did you hate your boss? This is devised to determine whether or not a candidate is being truthful. If the answer is their leaving was “mutual” the owner posits that there is usually more to the story than is being divulged. On the other hand, if the response is “It was time to move on” a follow up question usually is “What does that mean?”

Other examples cited in the post include:

What am I going to hate about you in the next 6 months?

What haven’t I asked that you want me to know about you?

How will we both know in six months that you are succeeding?

Why did you apply for this job?

None of the questions is illegal, improper or out of bounds during a job interview. Consequently, I advise jobseekers to add these new questions to their list of difficult-to-answer interview questions. And, perhaps more importantly, think about legitimate responses to them before your next job interview.

Until next time...

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

 

Meeting Update: BioConference Live:Clinical Diagnostics

The fourth BioConference Live: Clinical Diagnostics meeting will be taking place on October 20-21, 2010.   This online-only, live, interactive virtual event will cover new technologies, best practices and other pertinent topics for Clinical Diagnostics professionals. Registration is free and all interested persons can attend!  The conference is accredited by the ASCLS American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science and Professional Acknowledgment for Continuing Education (P.A.C.E.).

Therapeutic areas to be covered include: Infectious Diseases, Cancer, Diabetes, Allergy & Immunology, Cardiology, Point of Care, Automation, Molecular Diagnostics, Hematology, Laboratory Testing, Stem Cells, Protein Arrays, and Clinical Chemistry.

Some of the featured speakers include:

  1. Alan Wu Ph.D., Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology & Prof. Laboratory Medicine, San Francisco General Hospital and University of California, San Francisco
  2. Steven Burrill, CEO Burrill & Company
  3. David Persing M.D. Ph.D., Chief Medical and Technology Officer, Cepheid
  4. Peter Gilligan Ph.D., Professor of Microbiology-Immunology UNC Hospitals
  5. Thomas Goodwin Ph.D., Project Scientist (NxPCM) and Director Disease Modeling & Tissue Analogues Laboratory NASA
  6. Steven Binder, Director Technology Development Bio-Rad Laboratories
  7. Brad Karon M.D., Ph.D., FCAP, FACB, Vice Chair of Education in the Department of Laboratory Medicine Mayo Clinic
  8. Alex Rai Ph.D., Director, Specialty Laboratory, Chief Scientific Officer, Center for Advanced Laboratory Medicine, Columbia University
  9. Robert Fitzgerald Ph.D., Associate Professor, University of California San Diego

Login will take place on October 20th and 21st between 9 AM and 6 PM EST.

Sign Up Now and have a chance to win an iPad if you refer a friend!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Learning!!!!!!!!

 

A Guide to Managing Career Change

In this economy, many BioJobBlog readers may find themselves in the unenviable position of having to consider changing careers to find gainful employment. While career counselors like me can offer job seekers ideas about possible alternate or non-traditional careers, actual navigating a career change can be daunting, painful and often times overwhelming. With this in mind, I came across an article on HelpGuide.org that helps to demystify career changes and offers helpful hints (and links to useful articles) that describes how would- be career changers can manage and shepherd the process. 

"Changing Careers: A Guide"

Overview

The first step in considering a career change is to think carefully about what really drives you. You might find it hard to get past thinking about “what pays the most” or “what is most secure,” especially in today’s economy. However, it’s important to first discover your primary interests and passions. This can open doors to careers that you might not have considered. Once you have that foundation, you can start fine tuning your search to the right career. You may be surprised at how you can fit your passions into a certain career!

Explore your options

  • Focus on the things you love to do. What have you dreamed of doing in the past? What do you naturally enjoy doing? Jot down what comes to mind, no matter how improbable it seems.
  • Look for clues everywhere. Take note of projects or topics that stir your compassion or excite your imagination. Reflect on stories of people you admire. Ask yourself why certain activities make you happy, and pay attention to times when you are really enjoying yourself.
  • Be patient. Remember that your search may take some time and you might have to go down a few different roads before finding the right career path. Time and introspection will help you identify the activities you most enjoy and that bring you true satisfaction.

Overcome obstacles to happiness

It’s always challenging to consider a huge change, and there may be many reasons why you may think changing careers is not possible. Here are some common obstacles and how to overcome them:

  • It’s too much work to change careers. Where would I ever begin? Changing careers does require a substantial time investment. However, remember that it does not happen all at once. If you sit down and map out a rough plan of attack, breaking down larger tasks into smaller ones, it is a lot more manageable than you think. And if the payoff is a happier, more successful career, it’s worth it.
  • I’m too old to change careers. I need to stay where I am. If you have worked for a number of years, you may feel that you’ve put too much time and effort into your career to change midstream. Or you may be concerned about retirement and health benefits. However, the more you’ve worked, the more likely you are to have skills you can transfer to a new career. You may also consider planning a transition for after retirement if you are close to receiving a pension or other benefits after a number of years. 
  • I don’t have enough skills to consider a new career. You may be unaware of the skills you have, or underestimate your marketability due to low self esteem. However, you probably have more skills than you think. Consider skills you’ve learned not only from your job but from hobbies, volunteering or other life experiences. And gaining skills is not an all or nothing proposition. You can volunteer once a week or take a night class to move forward, for example, without quitting your current job.
  • In this economy, I’m lucky to have a job. I don’t want to rock the boat. In today’s climate, it might feel like too much of a risk to consider changing careers. However, if you’re unhappy in your current job, doing research on other options will only benefit you in the long run. You may discover a career with a more stable long-term outlook than your current career, for example. And you don’t have to quit your current job until you are confident of your new career path.

Dealing with underemployment and job loss

Being unemployed or underemployed can be tremendously stressful. You may be feeling the pressures of meeting mortgage payments or other financial obligations. You might be feeling ashamed with your family and friends. And a very real loss is that of your identity at work. This is especially true if you have been in the same field for a very long time.

However, unemployment also has a bright side. It gives you the chance to reflect on your career path where you might not have before. If you’ve been considering a new field, now is the time to research and see what might be the right fit for you. You may end up in a much stronger position than if you had originally kept your job.

To learn more, visit Job Loss and Unemployment Stress: Tips for Staying Positive During Your Job Search&

Identify occupations that match your interests

So how do you translate your interests into a new career? With a little research, you may be surprised at the careers that relate to many of the things you love to do. Many online tools can guide you through the process of self-discovery. Questions, quizzes, and temperament sorters can’t tell you what your perfect career would be, but they can help you identify what’s important to you in a career, what you enjoy doing, and where you excel. One example, frequently used by universities and the government, is the RIASEC/Holland interest scale. It identifies six common areas that people often feel especially drawn to, such as investigative, social, or artistic. Based on these areas, you can browse sample careers that match those interests.

The Career Decision-Making Tool

The Career Interests Game

The Motivated Skills Test

The Career Values Test

Research specific careers

If you have narrowed down some specific jobs or careers, you can find a wealth of information online, from description of positions to average salaries to estimated future growth. This will also help you figure out the practical priorities: How stable is the field you are considering? Are you comfortable with the amount of risk? Is the salary range acceptable to you? What about commute distances? Will you have to relocate for training or a new job? Will the new job affect your family?

Occupational Outlook Handbook (US Department of Labor)

Career Guide to Industries (US Department of Labor)

Best Careers (US News and World Report)

Get support and information from others

While you can glean a lot of information from research and quizzes, there’s no substitute for information from someone currently working in your chosen career. Talking to someone in the field gives you a real sense of what type of work you will actually be doing and if it meets your expectations.  What’s more, you will start to build connections in your new career area, helping you land a job in the future. Does approaching others like this seem intimidating? It doesn’t have to be. Networking and informational interviewing are important skills that can greatly further your career.

You may also consider career counseling or a job coach, especially if you are considering a major career shift. Sometimes impartial advice from others can open up possibilities you hadn’t considered.

Evaluate your strengths and skills

Once you have a general idea of your career path, take some time to figure out what skills you have and what skills you need. Remember, you’re not completely starting from scratch—you already have some skills to start. These skills are called transferable skills, and they can be applied to almost any field. Some examples include:

  • management and leadership experience
  • communication (both written and oral)
  • research and program planning
  • public speaking
  • conflict resolution and mediation
  • managing your time effectively
  • computer literacy
  • foreign language fluency

Identify transferable career skills

  • Don’t limit yourself to experiences only at work. When you are thinking about your skills, consider all types of activities including volunteering, hobbies and life experiences. For example, even if you don’t have formal leadership or program planning experience, founding a book club or organizing a toy drive are ways that you have been putting these skills into practice.
  • List your accomplishments that might fit in. Don’t worry about formatting these skills for a resume at this point. You just want to start thinking about what skills you have. It can be a tremendous confidence booster to realize all of the skills you’ve developed.
  • Brainstorm with trusted friends, colleagues or mentors. They might remind you of transferable skills you might have forgotten, and help you think of how you might want to articulate these skills in the future.
  • Learn more about your qualifications. Take the free online Transferable Skills Survey.

Develop new skills and acquire work experience

If your chosen career requires skills or experience you lack, don’t despair. There are many ways to gain needed skills.  While learning, you’ll also have an opportunity to find out whether or not you truly enjoy your chosen career and also make connections that could lead to your dream job.

  • Utilize your current position. Look for on-the-job training or opportunities to do projects that develop new skills. See if your employer will pay part of your tuition costs.
  • Identify resources in the community. Find out about programs in your community. Community colleges or libraries often offer low cost opportunities to strengthen skills such as computers, basic accounting, or how to start a business. Local Chambers of Commerce, Small Business Administrations, or state job development programs also are excellent resources.
  • Volunteer or work as an intern. Some career skills can be acquired by volunteering or doing an internship. This has the added benefit of getting you in contact with people in your chosen field. Visit Volunteering and its Surprising Benefits: Helping  Yourself while Helping Others
  • Take classes. Some fields require specific education or skills, such as an educational degree or specific training.  Don’t automatically rule out more education as impossible. Many fields have accelerated programs if you already have some education, or you may be able to do night classes or part-time schooling so that you can continue to work. Some companies even offer tuition reimbursements if you stay at the company after you finish your education.
  • Consider starting your own business If you’re getting worn down by long commutes or a difficult boss, the thought of being your own boss can be very appealing. And it may be you can find your perfect niche even in a slower economy. Depending on the specialty, some companies prefer to streamline their ranks and work with outside vendors. However, it is especially important to do your homework and understand the realities of business ownership before you jump in.

Make sure you are committed and passionate to your business idea. You  will be spending many long hours getting started, and it may take a while for your  business to pay off.

Research is critical. Take some time to analyze your area of interest. Are you filling an unmet need? Especially if you are considering an online business, how likely is your area to be outsourced? What is your business plan, and who are your potential investors? Learn more in the resources section below.

Expect limited or no earnings to start. Especially in the first few months, you are building your base and may have start up costs that offset any profit initially. Make sure you have a plan on how you will get through that time.

Final thoughts             

  • Pace yourself and don’t take on too much at once. Career change doesn’t happen overnight, and it is easy to get overwhelmed with all the steps to successfully change careers. However, you will get there with commitment and motivation. Break down large goals into smaller ones, and try to accomplish at least one small thing a day to keep the momentum going.
  • Don’t rush into a change because of unhappiness in your current job. If you are stressed and unhappy in your current job, or unemployed, you might be feeling a lot of pressure to make a quick change. However, if you don’t do enough research, you might end up in an even worse position than before, with the added stress of a new position and new learning curve.
  • Ease slowly into your new career. Take time to network, volunteer and even work part time in your new field before committing fully. It will not only be an easier transition, but you will have time to ensure you are on the right path and make any necessary changes before you are working full time in your new field.
  • Take care of yourself. You might be feeling so busy with the career transition that you barely have time to sleep or eat. However, managing stress, eating right, and taking time for sleep, exercise and especially loved ones will ensure you have the stamina for the big changes ahead.

 

 Related Career Change Links

Overcoming obstacles

Taking the Fear Out of Career Change – Provides specific action steps to common fears in considering a career change. (University of Minnesota Office of Human Resources)

How Fear Can Stop a Career Change – Outlines five main stumbling points to considering a new career, and how to move past them. (Suite101, commercial site)

Career investigation resources

Best Careers- US News and World Report – Provides updated information on good careers based on future outlooks and job satisfaction, as well as future trends and jobs that may be overrated. (US News and World Report, commercial site)

Occupational Outlook Handbook – Provides information on different careers/occupations, including what workers do on the job, working conditions, training and education needed, earnings and job prospects. (US Department of Labor)

Career Guide to Industries – Provides information on careers available by industry groupings. Also gives outlook on industry, overall earnings and training information. (US Department of Labor)

Job Hunters Bible  – Gives web resources and advice from Richard Nelson Bolles,’ author of What Color is Your Parachute?, on finding the right job or career, including tests and advice, research, making contacts, finding a job, and creating a resume. (JobHuntersBible, commercial site)

Career tests

Career Decision Making Tool – A comprehensive tool that walks you through defining career interests, from identifying key areas of interest using RIASEC codes to finding the careers that match those interests. (America’s Career Resource Network)

The Meyers Briggs Temperament Indicator II  – Offers a short Meyers Briggs exam to assess your temperament. Answer all the questions for a 4-letter personality indicator and an explanatory document. Registration required. (Advisor Team, commercial site)

Queendom – Offers a collection of tests and resources designed to help you along your path of self-discovery. (Queendom, commercial site)

Evaluating transferable skills

Transferable Skills (PDF) – Provides an overview of transferable skills most desirable for employers, and how you can apply your experiences to those areas. (USC Career Planning and Placement Center)

Transferable Skills Survey - A survey to help you zero in on your transferable skills. Rate your skills in five broad transferable skill areas. (University of Minnesota Duluth Knowledge Management Center)

Career counseling, education and job placement support

Employment & Training Administration – Information about federal job training programs and a section of the site, Regions & States, lists state and local employment resources for all states and regions. Also has a function to search the Fastest Growing Occupations by State. (US Department of Labor)

Jobs for the Future – Nonprofit organization that helps young people and undereducated adults get the training and education they need to get jobs. (Jobs for the Future)

The Women's Alliance - Organization of community-based members who provide professional attire, career skills training and related services to low-income women seeking employment. (The Women's Alliance)

Starting your own business

How to start your own business and maintain your sanity – Learn about the pros and cons about starting your own business including entrepreneurship in a slow economy, what to expect with investors and managing slow beginnings. (US News & World Report)

Starting a business – Provides step by step information on what you should consider when starting a business, including necessary licenses and permits, state and federal requirements, and pros and cons of incorporation (Nolo)

Tips for career changers

Career Changers: Make the Job Market Care – Tips on changing your perspective on careers and how to reduce frustrations and anger during your job search. (Psychology Today)

The 10 step plan to career change – Provides a checklist of areas to review in changing careers, including special sections for seniors, women and minorities.

Until next time...

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

 

Bristol-Myers Squibb to Cut 840 Jobs Worldwide

Several months ago, I posted an article that suggested that layoffs in the pharmaceutical industry were beginning to slow. Apparently executives at Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) didn’t read my blog post (I believe that they have in the past) and today announced that the company will eliminate 840 jobs or 3 per cent of its 28,000 member workforce.

The company says the jobs will be eliminated over the next six months, and the cuts could be spread across all its businesses and geographic locations. A BMS spokesperson indicated that company executives are still reviewing the entire organization to determine which jobs will be eliminated. The new round of layoffs is intended to further streamline the company. Interestingly, BMS purchased Seattle-based Zymogenetics for $885 million two weeks ago.

These cuts coupled with small biotechnology company acquisitions and a recent stock buyback initiative suggests that the company may be positioning itself for sale or merger. BMS’ top selling drug Plavix which represents almost 40 percent of the company’s revenue stream will lose patent protection in 2011.

Until next time...

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

 

Ho-Hum: Another Day, Another Pharmaceutical Company Joins the Social Media Fracas

The ever watchful Mark Senak of the highly informative EyeonFDA blog today reported that Eli Lilly had taken the social media plunge by creating a twitter account (@Lillypad) and also launching a blog cleverly entitled the LillyPad (get it; pad=launching point etc and the word pad is hot because of the iPAD). Ah, those clever pharmaceutical marketers; they never miss a thing!

As Mark points out in his post, Lilly had previously launched a YouTube Channel in 2008 called LillyDiabetes that almost immediately disappeared after he first blogged about it! According to the EyeonFDA post Lilly launched the blog and joined Twitter

"[b]ecause we feel passionately about a lot of issues that are important to our company and our industry, and we know there's plenty of passion well beyond our own walls.  Policy issues like health care reform have been top-of-mind with the public for a long time.  And industry watchers are placing an increased premium on trends like corporate citizenship.  These are important dialogues, and we're happy to provide a forum and participate."

However, as Mark aptly posited in his post, why are we so amazed when a pharmaceutical company launches a blog or engages in a social media campaign? After all, recent research indicates that nearly one-third of companies are blogging and that number is expected to increase to 43 percent by 2012. In fact, pharmaceutical company blogs are quickly becoming de rigueur. So, don’t be surprised if other companies jump on the social media bandwagon over the coming months. Maybe in the future the launch of a pharmaceutical blog, Facebook page or Twitterfeed may no longer be big news or even worthy of a blog post!

A quick perusal of the LillyPad blog reveals that many of the posts deal with issues like improving math and science education, job creation, American innovation, and healthcare solutions. Interestingly, many of these posts are consistent with recent public statements made by Lilly’s CEO John Lechleiter, PhD. It would be great if the LillyPad blog continues to post articles that provide Lilly stakeholders with insights into what management is thinking. This will certainly go a long way to help to create a “conversation’ between the blog and its followers: something that is critical to the success of any corporate social media campaign.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

 

Good News for Jobseekers (sort of): Pharma Job Losses Slow in August

The Pharmalot Blog reported today that a survey conducted by the outsourcing firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas shows that only 200 pharmaceutical employees lost jobs in August. This compared with the 2,023 jobs lost in July, 830 in June and the 6,943 in May. According to the post, this year’s job loss tally is 37,265 as compared with 53,004 in 2009.  Since 2007, it has been estimated that over 180,000 life sciences employees have lost their jobs.

While the slowing layoffs are encouraging, there are no signs that companies are going to be hiring in 2011 (unless you are willing to relocate to Asia). Further, while layoffs are slowing a big pharma companies, the number of scientists losing their jobs at biotechnology companies because of insufficient capital or merger and acquisition activities remains steady and will likely increase if Sanofi-Aventis purchases Genzyme and other biotechnology companies are purchased. For example, Pfizer announced today that it was purchasing FoldRx for an undisclosed amount. FoldRx’s pipeline contains preclinical and clinical candidates for investigational new drugs that treat diseases caused by protein misfolding. The acquisition is consistent with Pfizer’s intention to move into the orphan drug market.

From an historical perspective, the early 2000s was the golden age for life sciences employees in most Western countries. Unfortunately, the golden age has ended for Western employees and it appears that a new era for pharmaceutical and biotechnology employees is beginning in the Asia, South America and Africa!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

Roche Publicly Affirms Its Commitment to Social Media

Mark Senak, a pharmaceutical social media advocate and the author of the EyeonFDA blog, today reported that the Swiss pharmaceutical giant Roche published on its website a document entitled Social Media Principles. The document outlines Roche’s rules and regulations guiding the company’s use and commitment to social media.

In an accompanying statement, Roche officially affirmed the role of social media as part of its Communication Policy.

Roche actively uses Social Media to communicate with its stakeholders. As committed in our Communication Policy we want to be a transparent company and thus welcome this new form of communication.

Further, while the company recognizes the use and benefits of social media, it acknowledged the regulatory risks associated with the new medium

Roche recognizes the ubiquity and benefits of social media and welcomes its use - however, we also acknowledge that certain risks are associated with these new channels. We have therefore developed this guideline to help our employees use these new platforms in a responsible way.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, Roche appointed Sabine Kostevc as Head of
Corporate Internet and Social Media. 

Contact

Sabine Kostevc

Head of Corporate Internet and Social Media

She may be the first communication executive to hold an official title that has the phrase ‘social media” associated it. Surprisingly, this may be the biggest development of all; mainly because once one pharmaceutical company does something new, they all similar to follow!

Roche’s willingness to publicly commit to the use of social media is a bold and calculated move by a company that recognizes its power and the major role it will likely play in the future of the pharmaceutical industry. Further, it suggests that Roche, unlike most of its competitors, it willing to take a proactive role in helping to shape the social media regulatory guidelines being developed by the US Food and Drug Administration. Finally, Roche executives realize that increased transparency and open communications with its stakeholder may help to improve the public image of big pharma companies and perhaps rekindle the innovation that has been sorely lacking in the industry.

The bottom line: Rather than remaining part of the problem, Roche has boldly proclaimed that it wants to be part of the solution!

Hat tip to Mark and Roche!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting err Facebooking err Blogging!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Lilly Lays Off More Employees and Vows to Remain Lean

Despite assertions by its CEO that there isn’t enough scientific talent in the US, Eli Lilly announced that it will lay off a couple of thousand employees within the next 90 days. Most of the cuts will take place in Indianapolis at four different sites where the company currently employees about 13,000 workers. According to an article in today’s Indianapolis Star

“The struggling Indianapolis company, which has been cutting thousands of jobs in recent months, told the state on Monday that its downsizing is not temporary, but for the long haul.

The reductions in force at the Indianapolis sites of employment are expected to be permanent," wrote Kay Jackson, Lilly's senior director of human resources, in a letter to the Indiana Department of Workforce Development. She added that the cuts, when added up, are not expected to be more than 33 percent of the head count at any one site, or more than 500 workers at any site."

Like most of its rival big pharma companies, Lilly has cut the number of full-time equivalent workers by about 2,100 worldwide since last September. That's when it announced it would cut a total of 5,500 workers worldwide by 2011 to save $1 billion in annual costs. The reason for the cuts; an expected steep falloff in revenues over the next few years when the patents on Lilly's blockbuster drugs begin to expire and face low-priced generic competition  

John C. Lechleiter, Ph.D, Lilly’s CEO, contends that the lack of innovation and new product development at most American pharmaceutical companies can be explained by a dearth of qualified and adequately trained American scientists. Maybe this is why most pharma R&D job are currently being outsourced to China, India, Brazil and Eastern Europe? Alternatively, it may be cheaper to employ US-trained foreign nationals in these places rather than high priced American scientists who perform similar jobs in the US.  

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (forget Indiana-not there is anything wrong with it)

 

Yahoo News: "Warning on New Superbugs from S. Asia"--Another Example of Irresponsible and Sensationalistic Journalism

I read a post today on Yahoo News entitled “Warning on New Superbugs from S. Asia.” While I initially thought that this article may contain some important news on the real and growing of multiple drug resistant bacterial pathogens, I sadly learned that it was nothing more than an sensationalistic attempt to promote the discovery of a new metallo-beta-lactamase gene bla(NDM-1) in an Indian isolate of Klebsiella pneumoniae, a Gram negative bacterium. The work was performed by a group at Cardiff University in Wales and published almost a year ago in the journal Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

There is no question that morbidity and mortality from Gram negative infections is rising and will certainly continue to increase in the future. This is because most of the work in antibacterial drug discovery in the last decade was focused on Gram positive bacteria including methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin resistant enterococci (VRE). Although new antibiotics have reached the market for these organisms, they are used judiciously, and mainly as a last resort, because of fears of emerging resistance to them among Gram positive clinical isolates. Unfortunately, developing new antibiotics against Gram negative pathogens as compared with Gram positive bacteria is much more difficult. To that end, no antibiotics of note have been discovered in recent years to treat multiple drug resistant strains of Gram negative bacteria. 

While identification of the bla (NDM-1) gene may be scientifically and biologically interesting, it will likely have little effect on the clinical treatment of Gram negative infections. This is because many Gram negative isolates are already resistant to most beta-lactam antibiotics and consequently these antibiotics are used only sparingly to treat many Gram negative infections. Regardless of the implications of the discovery of the NDM-1, what I find most troubling about the article is its title. It leads uninformed persons to believe that the world is in grave danger and that a pandemic of multiple drug resistant strains of Gram negative bacteria may be imminent.  While infections caused by multiple drug resistance strains of Gram negative bacteria are clearly on the rise, strains carrying the NDM-1 gene will not decimate the world population any time soon! In fact, the authors suggest that these strains may cause some problems in India which “already has high levels of antibiotic resistance.”

There is no doubt that informing people about the growing incidence of multiple drug resistant bacteria is a good thing. Maybe, if enough people get frightened they may be able to induce big pharmaceutical companies—many of which abandoned antibiotic drug discovery and development in the late 90s—to reinvigorate their programs. That said, it is not clear why this story got elevated to a lead story on Yahoo News since the discovery was made almost a year ago—maybe today is a slow news day? Nevertheless, the impending doom and sensationalistic tone of the article suggests that reporters who cover the life sciences need some training in microbiology. This is necessary to insure that the stories that they write about antibiotics are kept in the appropriate context and historical perspective. That said, don’t be surprised today if the sales of antibacterial products increase and the stock prices of biotechnology companies involved in antibacterial drug discovery and development spike!

Until next time...

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

 

Words of Wisdom from the Executive Suite

For the past few years, CEOs have been taking a lot of heat; and in many cases rightfully so. However, from time to time some of these “captains of industry” say things that may be useful to ambitious young executives, employees and would-be entrepreneurs. 

The folks over at BestCollegesOnline sent me a link to a post entitled “The 30 Best CEO Interviews You Should Watch on YouTube.” While I haven’t seen any of the videos (I don’t have the luxury of time to do so), viewing some of them may be worth it!

Check them out and let me know if find a good one.

Until next time...

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

 

How Pharma SHOULD NOT Use Social Media

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent a warning letter on July 29 to Novartis admonishing the company for placing a Facebook Share widget on a website promoting the use of Tasigna a treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia. An excerpt from the warning letter is as follows:

"This website contains a “Facebook Share” social media widget1 that generates Novartis-created information for Tasigna that can be shared with Facebook users (i.e., “shared content”). The shared content is misleading because it makes representations about the efficacy of Tasigna but fails to communicate any risk information associated with the use of this drug. In addition, the shared content inadequately communicates Tasigna’s FDA-approved indication and implies superiority over other products".

Further according to the agency

“Facebook Share is a way for users of Facebook to share articles, pages, video, or flash content of a site with other Facebook users. Over two billion pieces of content are shared each week through Facebook. With two clicks, visitors to a website can share any page of that website through Facebook by generating a link to the page, along with a thumbnail image and a brief description (i.e., “shared content”) that will appear on the users’ profiles and, depending on privacy settings, in the home page stream of all of the users’ friends. Each time a link is shared by one user, potentially hundreds of new people may see and/or click through on the link.”

Novartis removed the widget as instructed in the letter by the agency. However, millions of people likely clicked the widget and received inappropriate information about Tasigna. The placement of a share widget on the Tasigna website is shocking because Novartis is not a newcomer to social media and the agency is in the process of formulating guidelines for the use of social media for promotional purposes. The recent Novartis brouhaha suggests that once again a big  pharma company is playing the tried and tested cat and mouse game with the agency to see how far they can push the limits before getting “spanked.” 

Perhaps big pharma companies that are interested in using social media for promotional purposes ought to study Novo Nordisk’s Race for the Cure Twitter campaign that is being used  to promote its insulin products. Unlike Novartis, Novo was very careful to work within established regulatory guidelines that guide print and broadcast media to create the Twitter campaign. To date, FDA has not sent Novo any warning letters about the campaign which appears to be wildly successful.

Hat tip to Ed at the Pharmalot Blog

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!

 

After a Lull, Pharma Job Cuts Rise Again

According to a post today on the Pharmalot Blog,

“After what appeared to be a slowdown in layoffs taking place in the pharmaceutical industry, job cuts are accelerating again, according to the latest monthly tally from Challenger, Gray & Christmas. There were 2,023 jobs lost in pharma in July, a notable uptick from the 830 lost in June. Overall, the industry has shed 37,010 jobs this year. “

While I think the massive layoffs that occurred in past three years are unlikely in the future, pharma companies will continue to downsize as patent expiry of blockbusters continue and M&A activity in the biotechnology sector rises.

Until next time,

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

 

Beware of Job Title Inflation

Although the economy is in the toilet and unemployment remains high, highly skilled and ambitious employees are usually not at risk of losing their jobs. In fact, these employees are highly sought after and frequently contacted by recruiters trying to get them to “jump ship.” In other words, there will always be jobs for these employees even though the rest of us may be unemployed. Companies clearly recognize the value of these employees and will use all available strategies to retain them. 

During good economic times, this usually means a promotion and a concomitant salary increase. However, during recessionary times companies tend to promote these “good” employees into position with greater authority without a pay raise: the assumption being that tacking on a fancy new job title with some added responsibilities will be sufficient to stroke an employee’s ego and ignore the lack of additional compensation for a larger workload. 

To that end, the folks over at the online masters degree website recently posted an article entitled Job Title Stuffing 101: 12 Buzzwords to Inflate a Job’s Importance. It is a veritable tutorial on inflated job titles and the one that you ought to avoid (see below) if possible.

1. Manager: This title may be given to anyone and everyone who ever heads up a project or department, no matter how large or small. It’s used to give slight leverage to the person in charge of the task at hand, but can mean little to the project manager’s supervisors. Because many companies push team creativity, the manager is primarily responsible for turning things in and will be the one to hear about if the boss isn’t satisfied

2. Strategist: A strategist of any type simply means you plan tasks and have some idea of how these tasks are most efficiently executed. For example, in the case of a content strategist, it means you create and organize the content of a newsletter, website, or blog. Is the job important? Sure. But for some reason content strategist sounds a lot more impressive than web editor. You take your pick, but if the former is going on your resume, you better deliver.

3. Deputy: In the age of the Internet, there’s a deputy for many jobs. What does this mean? Well, it means you aren’t quite a junior or an assistant, but the company doesn’t have the funds to pay you like they would someone with the actual title. An example is an editor-in-chief versus a deputy editor. One issuse that you may run into being a deputy of any sort is more on your plate than you bargained for. But you’re the deputy, so you can handle it, right?

4. Senior: Companies love to tack this one onto a title. Senior web writer or senior designers are common for firms. What does this senior title translate to? Anyone with 5+ years of experience in a field and still utilizing those skills can serve as a senior, usually without the pay or responsibilities of management. Simply put – you do your job well, but the buck stops here.

5. Producer: This one has become popular for the web. Web producer pops up on many mainstream blogs and sites. A producer can wear many hats, and for a company that means more bang for their buck. Sure, you will be producing content, but expect handling anything the project throws your way even if it isn’t in the job description (and there’s a solid chance it won’t be)..

6. Supervisor: Like managers, this title can be hit or miss. For large corporations that have had to cut back and eliminate lower level management, pawning the title of supervisor off on an entry level employee who’s been in their cubicle for six months means having someone in the office to make sure things run well without having to douse them in a raise. There are some supervisors who are able to oversee a small department, but ultimately are not the first in command for their subordinates.

7. Ambassador: This job title buzzword is almost an insult to the actual word! In the age of promoting, you know, everything, the job title of brand ambassador is given to celebrities in a niche group that endorse the product sometimes without appearing in ads. This person is contracted by the company or simply receives perks and free services from the brand. They often do little more than show up at launch parties and events and plugs the company as needed. For Channel, The Misshapes Leigh Lazar serves as a brand ambassador and for AT&T, there’s Internet has-been Justine. The problem with brand ambassadors is often large corporations are the last to discover the new face of a niche audience.

8. Professional: A friend says that anytime you have to tack the word professional onto your job title, you must not have a real job. This is up for debate, but let’s take a look at a couple of titles that utilize the word. How about professional organizer? Or records distribution professional? By the way, the latter is the new uppity name for mail room clerk. Yes, even those fresh out of college need an inflated job title. Professional used to mean you had proper training for whatever you do, now it means you are paid some type of wage for what you do, no matter how little that is or the responsibility it entails.

9. Consultant: Who knows what you do with this title. It can mean you directly fix problems, as in the case of IT consultants or it can mean you merely offer your advice, in the case of interior design consultants. Many consultants bring in the big bucks and are contracted by major corporations, but many others work for themselves and struggle to get by. While this title isn’t necessarily inflated, it doesn’t really give the total picture of what you’re hired to do either (which you may prefer).

10. Vice President: Somewhere in the past decade, a lot more vice presidents have shown up to the company picnic. Instead of having a manager of ____, that job became VP of Public Relations or VP of Human Resources. It means second-in-command, in that department and not much more. There used to be only one

VP per company, but we’re guessing the more, the merrier, even if it is job title inflation in its boldest form.

11. Global: Even a mom-and-pop shop can have a Global Director of Communications. It can be mom, working from the family’s dry cleaning business to update the company’s Twitter and Facebook pages. Many companies are employing social media personnel and since a lot of these companies indeed do business around the world, why not stick the word global onto the job title of someone who represents your business to the world? It makes the job sound more exciting and may get you onto someone’s Follow Friday!

12. Lead: The word lead in a job title can mean a lot or a little. In some cases, it means you are heading up an operation, but in most cases it means the company is utilizing you for your skills and maximum potential without proper pay. Some companies use this title as a stepping stone between entry level and a lower management position to see if someone is ready for the next tier of responsibilities.

While promotion without compensation is not novel, it is rampant in today’s uncertain economic times. A word of advice: if you are being considered for a promotion, the first thing that I would ask is whether or not the promotion comes with a pay increase. If not, you ought to think twice about accepting the promotion and call the recruiters back who are trying to lure you away to a competitor’s company. Accepting a position with increased responsibility without a pay raise sends a signal to management that you can be exploited and taken advantage of. And, management will likely continue to exploit you until you call that recruiter back who tells you that a person with your title and level of responsibility can earn much more at a competitor company! That begs the question: Is job title inflation without compensation really a good way to promote employee retention? I think not!

Hat tip to onlinemastersdegree.org

Until next time...

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

 

The Job Search: What Executives and Hiring Managers Are Looking for in Job Candidates

There is no question that interviewing is an art and that experienced job candidates may have a leg up on more junior candidates seekers when it comes to face-to-face (F2F) job interviews. That said, there is a commonly held belief among job seekers that hiring managers frequently ask silly, “bonehead” and irrelevant questions during F2F interviews. Examples of these frequently asked questions include “What are your strengths and weaknesses” and “Tell me how you overcame adversity or a difficult situation at work.” 

During a talk that I give on interviewing tips and insights, I usually make light of these and related questions and warn would be job seekers to be prepared for them during F2F job interviews. However, while I poke fun at these seemingly silly questions, responses to them are growing in importance in decision to determine whether or not to extend offers to job candidates. This is because during recessionary times employers have to be more judicious about the qualifications, skills and personalities of the persons that they hire. After all, jobs are few and far between at most companies and hiring managers want to insure that they derive the maximum benefit from all new hires. 

A good example of what goes into hiring decisions these days can be found in an article entitled “Hearing the Right Notes From a Job Candidate" written by Carl Diehl a co-owner of a franchised exercise company. In the article, he describes the interviewing and hiring criteria that he used to hire a person into an entry level position at his company. Much to my surprise the final hiring decision almost exclusively hinged on the response to the question “What do you consider to be the dark side or major weakness of your personality?” As Mr. Diehl aptly stated:

This type [of question] focuses on performance and accomplishing tasks, but can be oblivious to the emotional needs of themselves and others. Obviously, an awareness of this kind of flaw is very significant in business as well as in personal relationships.

Most of the applicants did not have a clue about what I was looking for when I asked about that “dark side.” The two finalists, however, told me that while people with this personality type might be very hard-working and results-oriented, they could also be unaware of the effects of their actions and words on other people. That demonstrated the kind of emotional maturity I was seeking.

Also high on his list were, energy, creativity and problem solving skills. I highly recommend those of you who are actively seeking employment to read the article. It will definitely help in your job search and prepare for your next F2F job interview.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Correction: High not "Hit" Throughput Screening

Yesterday, I posted a piece on "hit'  throughput screening (see below).  At the time, I learned about  'hit" throughput screening, I mentioned that  I had never heard of "hit" throughput screening but I did know about high throughput screening.  As it turns out, there was a problem in translation and in fact, there is no such thing as hit throughput screening and it is actually high throughput screening.  Mea Culpa!  I apologize for the error and in the future I will be assiduous in my fact checking before I post (a lesson that the boneheads in the Obama administration learned the hard way in the recent Sherrod brouhaha)

The Growth of High Throughput Screening

No; this isn’t a typo! My colleagues at Meet the Boss sent me a press release today about efforts underway at Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline to redefine HTS to mean “hit” throughput screening rather than high throughput screening. As many of you may know, high throughput screening which began in the mid 1990s was supposed to revolutionize drug discovery and development—it did not! Nevertheless, after almost 15 years of refinement it appears that the technology may be paying off and can be used as an adjunctive tool to expedite and lower the cost of small molecule and protein-based drug discovery. While I don’t know much about this emerging technology, the press release presented below suggests that a meeting about HTS may be in the works. 

It is understood that huge amounts of money have been invested into drug discovery and the biggest problem faced by the industry is investing in drugs which may not make it onto the market. Europe has always been seen to trail behind the US when discussing drug discovery within the pharmaceutical industry, but with the biotechnology revolution they have begun to catch and becoming a driving force within the global industry.

The NGP EU committee has been celebrating the success of their pioneering roles in genome sequencing and the development of proteomic. Pfizer has recently announced to the NGP Drug Discovery committee that they plan to roll out a hit identification and screening file strategy. The process will offer a new flexible strategy for hit identification while sculpting a more reliable and efficient screening process. 

High throughput screening (HTS) has grown rapidly over the last ten years and Pfizer themselves noted the huge advances in both detection technology and laboratory automation. Pfizer believe that not only big Pharma but also smaller companies can implement HTS as well. By implementing HTS,  it can remove the indecision over which compunds will be profiles, many smaller companies agonize over the costs of conventional profiling sometimes only choosing between 10 and 20 compounds, this already removes other possibilities before true research can really begin. Pfizer among other members of the NGP EU Drug Discovery committee wish to discuss how they wish to implement large scale profiling at a lower cost, while maintaining the incredible biological, technological, and scientific advancements they are already demonstrating globally.

GSK have also joined Pfizer recently in encouraging the implementation of HTS. “We are now at a stage where we can exploit the benefits of cutting edge technology for increased quality, performance and capabilities. We also have the option to supply the same number of compounds, with the same level of quality at an affordable price”. 

Key to discussions will be representatives from AstraZeneca - Goran Wennberg, VP Discovery Information, Bayer Schering Pharma - Andreas Busch, Head of Global Drug Discovery & Member of the Board , Novartis - Olivier Grenet , Group Head of Genome Biology ,GlaxoSmithKline - Tino Rossi, VP of PreClinical Drug Discovery & Enabling Technologies and Pfizer - John Mathias, Head of High Through Put Screening all determined to firmly place Europe as the Drug Discovery capital.

The discovery and implementation of HTS not only offers an opportunity to smaller Pharma companies but also the consumer, if research and quality is increased and cost decreased this in turn will be passed onto the consumer.

Stay tuned for more details.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

A New Job Search Tool is Added at BioJobBlog

Some of you may have noticed that a new tab entitled “BioCareers” has been added to the BioJobBlog navigation bar.  If you click on the tab you will be taken to the BioCareers a new  job board and search engine agent created by Career Management Source and BioCrowd

BioCareers offers real time job listings, application tracking, and e-mail job alerts. Employers can post jobs, advertise jobs, search resume databases and have jobs listed on other jobs like Job Job-Job Health and Twitter jobs. 

The search engine that powers BioCareers automatically pulls life sciences jobs in real time and updates job searches when positions are filled or new ones become available. Candidates can search for jobs by location or job title. One of the nicer features of BioCareers is candidate e-mail alerts that are automatically generated when new jobs are posted or added in real time by the search engine.

To check out BioCareers click on the BioCareers tab or here.  We are in beta right now; so let me know what you think!

Until next time...

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

 

Job Cuts Slow But Continue at Pharma and Biotech Companies

There are signs that the economy is improving and that unemployment levels have dropped from a high of 10.1 % to current levels which are hovering around 9.5 %. While this is good news, job cuts continue at many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies as drug candidates fail in clinical trials and technological advances make certain employees dispensable.

Yesterday, Johnson and Johnson announced that it would layoff 300 of 400 employees who work at the Fort Washington, PA plant that was responsible for the recent Tylenol brouhaha and recall. According to a post on the Pharmalot blog:

”The employees are being let go because it is not clear when the plant will operate again. A J&J spokeswoman says the “best estimate” is the middle of 2011. It isn’t clear at this point whether or not any McNeil executives who oversaw operations at the troubled facility will also be shown the door."

In other news, Adolor, a Pennsylvania-based specialty drug maker, announced yesterday that it was laying off 30 workers or 30 per cent of its workforce to preserve capital and advance its opioid bowel dysfunction clinical development program through proof-of-concept studies in 2011. Also on Friday, the company stated in a press release that two new drug candidates it was developing with Pfizer to treat pain caused by osteoarthritis did not work better than a placebo in a Phase II clinical trial involving 400 patients. The company has one drug on the market, Entereg, a treatment that helps restore bowel function in adults who have undergone bowel re-section surgery. Earlier in the week, GlaxoSmithKline, which co-developed Entereg, scaled back its relationship with Adolor.

Finally, Eli Lilly & Co told its employees that it plans to cut 340 information technology jobs in 2010. Most of the cuts will take place in Indiana (Lilly’s corporate headquarters is in Indianapolis). The company has 1,350 information technology employees nationally. Earlier this year, Lilly has said it will eliminate 5,500 jobs by the end of 2011 to save $1 billion.

Until next time...

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

 

The Job Search: Appropriate Interviewing Behavior

Congratulations! The resume that you spent many hours carefully crafting has resulted in a face-to-face interview at a Company that you are extremely interested in. After the adrenalin rush has worn off, you think “OMG, I have to put together a seminar, make travel arrangements and buy new clothes and shoes (well only if you are a woman)”. Although you may think that the hard part of your job search is over; think again….the fun is just beginning.

The fact that you been invited to a face-to-face interview means that you likely possess the knowledge and technical skills required to performed the job that was advertised. The true intent of a face-to-face interview is to determine whether a job candidate has the personality and so called “soft skills” to easily fit in with a company’s corporate culture. Corporate cultures and soft skill expectations vary widely from company to company. That said, it is important to remember that certain types of behavior are expected of ALL job candidates during a face-to-face interview. I discuss a few of these expected behaviors below.

First, regardless of the state of affairs in your personal or professional life, you must always be upbeat and positive. Every person you meet should be greeted with a smile and a comment that goes something like “It is a pleasure to meet you”. Nobody wants to talk with (or possibly work with) a chronically unhappy or negative person. True, there ought to be diversity in the workplace (unhappy people have rights too) but when it comes to a positive attitude it is a requirement in the corporate world. Second, always make eye contact with your interviewers. We are social creatures and not making eye contact may signal to the interviewer that you are either anti-social or lack basic interpersonal communication skills. Further, never interrupt an interviewer when they are asking you a question. Yes, everyone gets excited and wants to show the interviewer how smart they are, but cutting a person off in mid-sentence is not polite nor is it ever appreciated by the person who is talking. Always answer questions directly and honestly. Never exaggerate or stretch the truth (as appealing as it may seem in the moment)….it will likely come back to haunt you in future. Also, do not offer the interviewer more information than is necessary. For example, an interviewer may say “I see that you did your postdoctoral work with Dr. Doolittle at MIT”. An appropriate response to this statement could be something like “Yes, he/she was my supervisor during my 8 years in the lab. An inappropriate response may go something like “Yes I worked with Dr. Doolittle for 8 years and, I have to tell you, it was the worst 8 years of my life because Dr. Doolittle is nuts”. Although Dr Doolittle may actually be nuts, you do not know what the interviewer’s opinion of Dr. Doolittle is and, for all you know, they could be best friends. Which leads me to my next recommendation– never play the name game. What I mean by the name game is illustrated in the following example. An interviewer asks you, “BTW, did you ever work with Dr. Spock while you were working for Dr. Doolittle at MIT?” If you did in fact work with Dr. Spock, an appropriate response may be “Yes, I worked with Dr. Spock on several occasions.” It is never a good idea to share your actual experiences or true feelings (positive or negative) about a person with the interviewer. This is because you do not know what the relationship is between the interviewer and the person whose name was mentioned. In the example with Dr. Spock, it may be that Dr. Spock slept with the interviewer’s spouse (stranger things have happened) a few years ago and saying anything remotely positive about Dr. Spock, in this instance, is highly unlikely to garner you a job offer.

Frequently, candidates either go out to lunch or dinner with company employees who are hosting the interviewing visit. Just because you are no longer talking with these folks onsite, don’t think that you can relax, kick off your shoes and let your hair down. Contrary to popular belief, you are still being carefully scrutinized and evaluated for your social skills and how you might represent the company (if hired) in social situations. That said, follow the lead of your host(s). If he/she orders an alcoholic beverage, then it is perfectly acceptable for you to also order a drink. However, if you tend to “loosen up” after a few drinks (remember; loss lips sink ships) it may be wise to limit or not drink alcohol during the meal. Finally, and surprisingly perhaps most importantly, remember to turn off all electronic devices before you step in the building to begin your interview. In fact, you may want to leave your cell phone in your rental car or briefcase (turned off ) for the entire interview. A ringing cell phone during an interview is a definite “job killer”.

Until next time…..

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

 

The Job Search:The Art of Resume Writing

One of the many things that I was not taught in graduate school (or as a postdoctoral fellow for that matter), was how to prepare a resume. Despite opinions to the contrary, a resume is a very important document that must be well organized and carefully crafted. This is because the first thing that every hiring manager sees when looking for new employees is a job applicant's resume. As the old adage goes, first impressions are the most important and the ones that last the longest. That said, it is typically in a job candidate's best interest to have the first impression be a good one. To that end, resume should not be prepared hastily nor should theybe crafted without a substantial amount of thought and consideration. I do not want to get into the nuts and bolts of resume writing in this post. However, every resume should contain the following information:

  • Contact information including name, phone number and e-mail address (mailing addresses are optional)
  • A summary of qualifications that concisely represents your skill sets and talent that you want a prospective employer to know about
  • Chronological listing of your professional experiences to date and an accompanying description of your accomplishments at each position
  • Education including undergraduate, graduate or certificate credentials (dates obtained are optional)
  • Awards and honors
  • Membership in any societies or relevant organizations
  • Any special skills or talents you may possess, e.g. website design, underwater basket weaving, etc.
  • Publications (abstracts and presentations are optional)
  • In general, references should not be included on a resume (if an employer asks for them, send them under separate cover or simply place them on the resume sent to that employer)

As scientists, we are trained to believe that personal achievements will be recognized and that promoting or marketing oneself is a "no-no". However, in the real world, self promotion and aggressive, shameless self marketing is what enables most individuals to get jobs and embark on successful careers. With this in mind, a well organized and carefully crafted resume is one of the most powerful marketing tools at your disposal! As we say in the recruiting biz, a resume will get you in the door......after that, it is up to you to "sell" yourself. 

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

The Job Search: Transcending the Transition from Academia to the Real World

The ever-increasing competition for faculty positions is forcing many graduate students and postdocs to consider careers outside of academia with a likely eye on industrial jobs. Unfortunately, many of these would be industrial scientists lack the appropriate training and qualifications for entry-level jobs at pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. This is because most undergraduate and graduate programs do not offer training to their students in drug development, quality systems and manufacturing. The reasons for this include: 1) lack of well informed and qualified faculty members to initiate and develop specialized curricula on these topics and 2) a belief that job training is the responsibility of prospective employers, not academic researchers. Unless substantive curricular change is made to existing academic programs, the road to employment for many students will continue to be bumpy and fraught with difficulty. 

In contrast with academic research, industrial research is highly regulated and guided by legally-enforceable rules and regulations, e.g., Current Good Laboratory Practices (cGLP), Current Good Clinical Practices (cGCP) and Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP). These rules and guidelines were created by regulatory agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure the development of safe and efficacious products. In recent years, the FDA has begun to enforce these rules and regulations more strictly. As a result, many life sciences companies now require that prospective employees understand cGLP, cGCP and cGMP guidelines and how to apply them in industrial laboratory settings. Because these rules and regulations are specific to industry and relatively unknown in academia, most academically-trained job candidates fail to qualify for these industrial jobs. Finally, over the past five years, there has been a growing emphasize on the importance of so-called "soft skills" e.g., good oral written and communication skills, teamwork, professional behavior, etc. in existing and prospective employees. These skills are increasingly important as life sciences companies grow larger, more diverse, and increasingly multidisciplinary in their approach to drug discovery and development. Unfortunately, few academic programs develop these skills in a systematic way; this failure hinders the ability of students to obtain industrial jobs.

Although the transition from academia to industry can be difficult, students can do several things to improve their odds. First, take advantage of available resources in preparing your resume and learning how to interview for an industrial position. A well written, carefully crafted resume can result in an interview, and a professional interviewing style can increase the likelihood of a job offer. Working with a skilled and well-connected professional recruiter may also increase the probability of securing an industrial job.

Second, many community colleges and several companies now offer specialized training in quality systems, regulatory affairs (cGLP, cGMP and cGCP) and other areas. Finally, there is no better way to get an industrial job than to have previous industrial experience. To get industrial experience, seek out training opportunities that include an industry internship as part of the curriculum. Some biotech and pharmaceutical companies may offer volunteer opportunities,  paid internships and some still have postdoctoral positions available for qualified applicants.

Until next time...

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

Interviewing Advice from a Fortune 500 CEO

In this past Sunday’s New York Time Business section there was an interview with Robert W. Selander the CEO of Mastercard who is retiring after 14 years on the job. When queried about the type of questions and information he tries to gather during job interviews, he replied:

 “Beyond the discussion of what you (the candidate) is going to do for us I want to know two or three of your strengths and weaknesses. Then I will ask you about two or three things that you acknowledged as flat sides and how you think we should work on those, how you think we should ensure those don’t become barriers to success.”

While many of you who read BioJobBlog may not be interviewing for senior management or executive-level job, it is instructive to realize that interviewers will almost always ask you to talk about your professional strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, as I have recommended in the past, it is a good idea to think about or even write down answers to the what are your strengths and weaknesses questions. But, it is important to remember that the weaknesses that you offer up must be the type that can also easily be viewed as possible strengths!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Interviewing

 

BioJobBlog Teams with Career Management Source to add a Career Center to Promote Real Time Life Science Jobs

BioJobBlog and Career Management Source, a producer of online applications for streamlining job searching and hiring, have teamed to create BioCareers, a life sciences job board and career center. For job candidates, BioCareers offers real time job listings, application tracking, and e-mail job alerts. Employers can post jobs, advertise jobs, search resume databases and have jobs listed on other jobs like Job Job-Job Health and Twitter jobs. 

The search engine that powers BioCareers automatically pulls life sciences jobs in real time and updates job searches when positions are filled or new ones become available. Candidates can search for jobs by location or job title. One of the nicer features of BioCareers is candidate e-mail alerts when new jobs are posted or added in real time by the search engine.

I have been looking for a dedicated life sciences jobs search engine and career management solution for the past 10 years. I stumbled upon the Career Management Source platform quite by accident but I am glad that I did. And, the best part of the deal was that I didn’t have to do any of the work—the design, setup and implementation was completed by Career Management Source representatives.

You can test the BioCareers search engine capabilities by conducting a job search using the widget found in the BioJobBlog sidebar (look left). If you are interested in viewing and checking out the BioCareers website please click here.

For those of you, who may be interested in adding a career center to your blog or website, please visit www.JobJobHealth.com or e-mail Career Management Source or call 888-865-8914.

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Job Searching!!!!!!!!

 

Lilly and Walmart to Sell Co-Branded Insulin?

The once venerable drugmarker Eli Lilly & Co yesterday announced that it would co-brand its Humulin insulin product with Walmart one of the world’s largest retailers starting in mid September. According to a Lilly spokesperson the product will be sold in U.S. Wal-Mart pharmacies.

Humulin, with $1 billion in worldwide sales for Lilly last year, will be Lilly’s first co-branded product with a retail pharmacy and will replace Wal-Mart’s current Relion insulin brand. The Lilly-Walmart deal is indicative of the massive changes that are taking place in the pharmaceutical industry as generic products begin to encroach on blockbuster brand name product franchises. 

The move will undoubtedly expand the product lifecycle of Lilly’s Humulin brand given Walmart’s vast distribution channels and its gargantuan customer base.

Until next time...

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

 

Pharma and Philanthropy?

Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies like to distinguish themselves from companies that manufacture consumer products because their products have the potential to save the lives of patients suffering from a plethora of illnesses. While a life-saving cancer treatment may inherently be more valuable than a pair of snow tires, the goal of the companies that manufacture them is to sell enough products to remain profitable. To that end, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have an edge over consumer products companies because drug makers can use altruism and philanthropy to market their drugs. In fact, many drug manufacturers play up their commitments to altruism and philanthropy to justify high drug prices because of the enormous costs associated with drug discovery and development. This tactic begs the question: “Just how philanthropic are drug makers?”

To answer this question The Access to Medicine Foundation created the Access to Medicine Index .which provides a benchmark on the access to medicine policies and practices of the largest global pharmaceutical companies.The index is designed to offer stakeholder and prospective investor ways to compare pharma’s social responsibility records by measuring 106 indicators that examine activities across seven criteria such as philanthropy, patents, pricing and management (see more here)

The 2010 index (only the second of its kind) ranked 26 pharmaceutical companies on their efforts to provide access to medicines, vaccines and diagnostic tests to people living in 88 countries. The companies included 20 originator (branded) companies – those who primarily market patented drugs they have developed – andsix companies whose primary business is the production and sale of generic medicines. The results are shown below:

Branded Pharmaceutical Companies

  1. GlaxoSmithKline
  2. Merck
  3. Novartis
  4. Gilead Sciences
  5. Sanofi-Aventis
  6. Roche
  7. AstraZeneca
  8. Novo Nordisk
  9. Johnson & Johnson
  10. Abbott Labs
  11. Pfizer
  12. Boehringer Ingelheim
  13. Eli Lilly
  14. Bayer
  15. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  16. Eisai
  17. Merck KGA
  18. Takeda Pharmaceuticals
  19. Astellas Pharma
  20. Daiichi Sankyo

Generic Manufacturers

  1. Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited
  2. Cipla Limited
  3. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories
  4. Mylan, Inc
  5. Sun Pharmaceuticals
  6. Teva Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

While the lists may seem impressive, Index founder Wim Leereveld cautions: “…the industry as a whole still has a long way to go.”

Ed Silverman, who runs the Pharmalot Blog, offered his insights about the list and the foundation’s findings: “The report, of course, will be used to defuse critics, such as non-governmental organizations and activist groups, who say not enough is done to make meds accessible in poor countries. The arguments often center on compulsory licensing and free-trade agreements, as well as intellectual property disputes, pricing and donations. Pharma, you may recall, has been on the defensive ever since they fought South Africa over HIV meds, and is now ramping up operations in so-called emerging markets, many of which are low-margin operations where incomes are lower. “

I don’t fault drug makers for aggressively marketing their products to generate revenues to insure profits and growth. After all, business is business. However, I think that it is disingenuous to use altruism and philanthropy as a means to market and sell high priced drugs. Ironically, this practice tends to limit the access of poor and disenfranchised patients who might benefit the most from these medicines.

Hat tip to Ed at Pharmalot

Until next time...

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

 

Life Sciences Job Update: Which Ones are Hot!!!

While the layoffs at pharma and biotech companies continue, the good news is that fewer jobs are being lost in 2010 as compared with 2009. Despite the massive loss of R&D and sales and marketing jobs, many life sciences companies are beginning to hire again. In general, job opportunities at emerging growth public biotech and venture-backed start-ups appear to be growing while those at big pharma and big biotech are stagnant or shrinking. Specifically companies are looking to hire:

  1. Clinical affairs managers and executives
  2. Regulatory affairs personnel and executives
  3. Commercial and operational expertise at all levels
  4. Business development executives
  5. Chief financial officers
  6. Investor relations and corporate communications professionals
  7. CEOs (venture capital investors are beginning to part with their capital again)
  8. Board of directors candidates (especially those with specific functional expertise in clinical development, regulatory affairs or commercialization)

A quick perusal of the list indicates that most of these jobs are not traditional science-related jobs and many may require additional training and expertise; especially in business. That said, now may be a good time to re-evaluate whether or not a MBA may be in your future.

Until next time....

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

 

Biocareers: Some Advice for Would Be Entrepreneurs

More and more people are losing their corporate jobs because of the recession. The bleak job market coupled with diminishing opportunities for older, seasoned employees is forcing many to consider starting their own businesses to join the ranks of the self employed. However, before you take the leap, I highly recommend that you read Phyllis Korkki’s article in this Sunday’s New York Times entitled “Taking the Leap To Self Employment.

As a person who successfully made the leap, she offers amazing insights into what it really takes to be successful as an entrepreneur or small business owner. Most importantly, would be entrepreneurs must possess three important characteristics: motivation, drive and passion. If you lack any of the three, chances are that you are not cut out to be self employed or entrepreneurial enough to start your own company. Also, she aptly points out that one of the major drawbacks of self employment is loneliness. I cannot stress enough that this is the major complaint of most self employed persons that I know. 

While nobody wants to admit it, humans are social animals who need to interact with one another to fulfill the evolutionary need to be “social.” Luckily, the advent of social media has helped to overcome the daily loneliness experienced by many entrepreneurs and self employed persons. That said, before you make the leap, please read the article—it will help to determine whether or not self employment is right for you!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

YouTube and Pharma: An Update

There is no question that video is taking the Internet by storm and is quickly replacing the written word as a means of communication. Despite the obvious business opportunities offered by videos, most big pharma companies have failed to jump on the video bandwagon. As always, there are exceptions to the status quo and a handful of life sciences companies most notably Johnson & Johnson, have been experimenting with video over the past few years.

According to Mark Senak, the unofficial life sciences company video archivist and author of the always insightful EyeonFDA blog, there are presently about 15 companies that have channels on YouTube; the largest video sharing website on the Internet. Previously, Mark was able to find 10 or so active companies on the YouTube website. Despite this modest increase, Mark notes that most pharma YouTube channels are not regularly maintained and suffer from lack of original content. 

There is no question that video is expensive to make if it is done commercially. However, Ken Grant at Analtech, a small chromatography company in Delaware, who has successfully used video to drive and improve business outcomes, contends that a low cost Flip video camera or equivalent is sufficient to get the job done! 

I suspect that big pharma may be waiting for FDA to weigh in on the use of social media for promotional purposes before it allocates any resources for video production. However, as I have stated many times before, social media can be used in many other ways (besides for promotional purposes) to meet business objectives and maintain corporate brand integrity. Until pharma marketers and brand managers recognize this, social media and pharma will be a moot point.

Until next time...

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

 

New Directions: Pfizer Creates an Orphan Drug Division

Pfizer today announced plans to set up a Rare Diseases Research Unit that will target the more-than-6000 global orphan diseases. For those of you who may not know, orphan diseases are classified by the US Food and Drug Administration as those that afflict 200,000 persons or less.

According to a press release, Pfizer’s new division will “pursue treatments across all therapeutic areas and modalities and will serve as the focal point for the company’s existing research on rare diseases”. It also intends to “work closely with patient advocacy groups, like the National Organization for Rare Diseases, as it develops and advances the unit’s research strategy. It will be lead by Edward Mascioli, most recently the head of Dapis Capital, a private equity firm. Previously he was vice president of clinical affairs at Peptimmune and senior medical director at Paraxel.

Pfizer’s decision to enter the orphan drug market signals that no markets are too small for big pharmaceutical companies to consider in an era where blockbuster drugs are few and far between. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that orphan drugs (which are generally biologics) offer drug maker several perks including: seven years of market exclusivity, tax breaks and credits, reduced clinical trials costs and expedited regulatory review. More importantly, perhaps, orphan drugs are highly priced and can yield impressive returns even though they are used to treat small patient populations. For example, several of Genzyme’s drugs such as Myozyme and Cerezyme—both designated as orphan drugs—have already reached over $1.0 billion in annual sales. 

While sales of orphan drugs may never reach those of Plavix, Lipitor, Epogen and other multibillion dollar blockbusters, garnering US regulatory approval for four or more (which cost much less than $1.5 billion to develop) will likely provide a substantial ROI to companies that develop them. Also, developing drugs that improve the quality of life for patients with no other treatment options will undoubtedly go a long way to improve tarnished reputation of the pharmaceutical industry.

Until next time...

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

 

Eight Common Mistakes Made During Job Interviews

Now that the economy is improving and the job market is loosening up a bit, the likelihood of a face-to-face job interview is increasing. The folks over at Best Online Colleges recently sent me a post about common mistakes made during job interviews and how to avoid them. While some of the proffered suggestions and tips overlap with some of my own, there are several that are new and novel and worth considering. 

Like most other things in life, practicing your interviewing skills will improve your performance and increase the probability of receiving a job offer. That said, take a look the list and see whether or not you can avoid these oft time embarrassing mistakes during your next face-to-face.

  1. Forgetting the name of your interviewer
    Often times, a company will give you the name of your interviewer when it contacts you to set up an interview. In these cases, not knowing their name as you set foot in their office is inexcusable. If first impressions are everything, then you’ve scored a zero before the process has even started. Be sure to memorize their name as soon as you get it, and if you forget, look for clues in their office – like a nameplate.
  2. Succumbing to your nerves
    Remember that you aren’t facing a firing squad – your life isn’t at stake, so don’t act like it. What’s the worst that could happen? You won’t get the job you already didn’t have? Don’t work yourself into a panic. Vomiting on your interviewer’s desk, sweating like an NBA basketball player or shaking like you’re sitting in a 727 that’s hitting turbulence are way worse than a couple of stutters. Clear your mind beforehand and keep things in perspective.
  3. Relaxing too much
    If you have too much perspective – or just nerves of steel – don’t make it apparent by propping your feet up on your interviewer’s desk, for example. Don’t make inappropriate jokes or inane comments. Unless instructed otherwise, you should act formally and business-like. Your behavior should be 100 percent professional. More likely than not, they’ll judge you based on how you act during that short period of time.
  4. Divulging too much
    In the haste to appear as open as possible, many interviewees tend to give too much information. But honesty isn’t always the best policy. Your prospective employer doesn’t need to know about the three-month-long coke binder you went on after freshman year. They don’t want to hear about how your previous boss did his best to imitate Bill Lumbergh. Only disclose what they need to hear related to your performance as an employee.
  5. Coming empty-handed and empty-minded
    Don’t give your interviewer the impression that you didn’t take any time to prepare before meeting with them. They’ve done their homework and they expect you to do yours. It’s essential that you study the company. How’s it performing? What’s its mission? How does the position for which you’re applying fit into the grand scheme of things? Be sure to bring additional copies of your resume, a list of your professional references, the job posting (if possible), and a pen and notepad.
  6. Transforming into a phony salesman
    No interviewer likes a phony – unless of course your prospective job title is “phony salesman.” But in most cases, acting overly-enthusiastic can be off-putting. They know you really want the job. You don’t have to pretend it’s the best job in the history of jobs. And don’t exaggerate your abilities. If you try too hard to say what your interviewer wants to hear, they’ll know.
  7. Cell interruption
    There’s nothing ruder than a noisy cell phone chiming in during an exchange with your interviewer. Silence your phone before entering the building. Mom’s “Good Luck <3" text message will still be there after the interview and the sentiment will remain the same.
  8. Succumbing to your ADD
    The worst is when an interviewer gives a long-winded information-filled speech and you’ve only managed to absorb the first sentence. Take a deep breath, slow your racing mind and give them your full attention. You don’t want to respond with a blank stare when they ask if you have any questions.

Hat tip to Best Online Colleges!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Pharma Edges Closer to Using Social Media for Non-Promotional Purposes

Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and MedTrust Online, an online oncology information site announced the development of CancerTrials App, the first free geo-locating oncology clinical trials application for the Apple iPhone and iPad platforms.

According to a press release, oncologists can easily find and share information about experimental therapies in clinical trials with their patients. CancerTrials App provides a quick search menu based on 12 common cancers and more advanced features that refine searches based on criteria such as gender, age, trial status and more. Once relevant clinical trials are found, results can be mapped relative to the location of the iPhone or iPad running the application. These features should help oncologists connect patients to appropriate regional and local clinical trials for which they may be eligible. Obviously, the app will help to bolster clinical trial enrollment in the oncology space.

While not a full blow geo-based social media platform like FourSquare,the Cancer Trials app is a step in the right direction and demonstrates the power of mobile medical applications and the potential of social media to improve clinical drug development. 

CancerTrials App for the iPhone and iPad is the first release of the application that connects to MedTrust Online's proprietary databases of oncology information. Other apps for RIM's BlackBerry and Google's Android operating systems will be released over the next several months.

Hat tip to GSK which has boldly gone where no other pharma company has gone before!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Why Layoffs Won't Help Big Pharma

For the past three years, I assiduously have attempted to track all of the major layoffs announced by big pharma and biotechnology companies. Quite honestly, it has been hard to stay on top of these almost weekly announcements. To date, over 200,000 life sciences employees have lost their jobs. And, I don’t think that job layoffs will abate for a year or more.

While pharma layoffs make sense in the short term—most notably to insure that stock share prices remain as inflated as possible—they are not going to solve pharma’s lack of innovation and the rising attrition rates for new molecular entities. On paper, outsourcing R&D make perfect fiscal and scientific sense. After all, there are literal thousands of US-trained scientists all over the world these days; mainly in China, India and Eastern Europe and it is much more cost effective to do research in these regions. However, in my opinion, outsourcing R&D, like layoffs, is a short term strategy that will likely backfire and not deliver the anticipated ROI. For example, many US technology companies that outsourced sizable portions of their operations in the early 2000 are now beginning to bring them back to the US as Asian labor costs continue to rise and product quality declines. This begs the question: what should big pharma companies do to regain their edge to bring new medicines to market?

Allan Haberman, of Haberman Associates, wrote a compelling post several months ago on his blog the Biopharmconsortium Blog where he offers some insights and strategies that may help big pharma out of its current lack of innovation and new product development.  Until that happens, I will continue to track pharma and biotech company layoffs as they are announced.

Until next time....

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

 

Tracking Pharma Job Cuts

There are rumors that companies are hiring again and that pharmaceutical jobs may begin to make a comeback over the next six months to a year. This  may be a real possibility based on a new report released yesterday the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas, Inc.

According to the report , 51,034 pharmaceutical employees lost their jobs by the end of May 2009. In contrast, by the end of May this year, only 34,157 pharma employees received pink slips. This represents a 33% reduction in the number of people being layed off as compared with the same time period last year. 

These data can be interpreted in a couple of different ways. First, fewer pharmaceutical employees are getting layed off which means that the economy may be getting better and the job market may be improving. Second, pharma companies can no longer continue to layoff employees at 2009 rates without impacting their with day-to-day operations.

Personally, as a half-empty kind of guy, I think the later hypothesis is more likely! Only time will tell whether or not the economy has truly turned a corner and when we can expect pharma companies to begin hiring en masse again.

Hat tip to Ed at Pharmalot.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting???

 

Social Media and Pharma: Adverse Events Reporting Revisited

Last week I attended the Advanced Learning Institute’s conference on social media and pharma. During several question and answer periods, I raised the idea about using social medial tools to improve adverse effects (AE) reporting and post marketing drug surveillance activities. While there was a lot of head nodding suggesting that many of the conference attendees agreed with the points I was making, the conversation about social media and AE reporting was extremely muted. I suspect that most pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies don’t want to discuss the topic until the US Food and Drug Administration issues its mythical regulatory guidance on the use of social media for promotional and other purposes some time next year (?).

John Mack aka Pharmaguy is an ardent supporter (like me) of the use of social media for AE reporting. John was at the meeting and he mentioned that the next day he would be giving a talk on that topic to the World Drug Safety Congress in Washington, DC. Conveniently, he posted a copy of the talk to Slideshare and his blog, Pharma Marketing Blog before his talk.

John’s ideas and insights into the use of social media tools for AE reporting are spot on (and consistent with mine of course!). I highly recommend that those of you who are interested in learning more about this topic take a look at the presentation; it is very informative and quite well done.

It is anybody’s guess at this point whether or not pharma will embrace social media and use it for more than promotional and marketing purposes. However, there is a growing body of evidence which suggests that pharma is beginning to realize that they can no longer fight the pressure from its stakeholders to embrace social media.

Stay tuned for late-breaking social media and pharma news!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting, Blogging, Videoing etc!

 

Possible "Side Effects" of Online Patient Communities

I want to state at the onset of this post that I am an ardent supporter of online patient communities because I believe that the exchange of information between people who suffer from the same or similar medical conditions is vital to their health and well being. Further, I believe that social media will force physicians, the medical community and the US healthcare system to become more transparent, open and interactive. That being said, in this past Sunday’s New York Times, Natasha Singer wrote an extremely revealing article about some possible, unforeseen “side effects” associated with membership in online patient communities.

The reason why these online communities exist is for patients to commiserate with one another and exchange personal stories and medical information. While personal stories may be emotionally satisfying for patients, it is their medical information and demographic data that is extremely valuable to drug makers. To that end, many online patient communities inform their members that they reserve the right to share information and data for research purposes. And many of them do!

To be clear, I am not suggesting that the people who create or manage online patient communities have avaricious, nefarious or otherwise unsavory ulterior motives for the medical and patient demographic data that they collect. However, these communities need to generate revenue in order to stay in business and drug makers are willing to pay for access to it.

According to Singer, the popular PatientsLikeMe community admits that it sells health and medical data gathered from member profiles (but with certain identifying information removed) to pharmaceutical companies and others for scientific and marketing research purposes. Further, a large number of unbranded “disease awareness” pages have recently begun to appear on Facebook and YouTube. In her article, Singer contends that “drug companies may pay people to moderate patient forums [in the community] or give testimonials but might not prominently display that fact to participants. Other sites collect consumer health data to help drug makers’ aim at specific kinds of consumers, using psychological cues.” At a medical communications meeting that I attended several years ago, a MySpace sales rep freely admitted to me that it allow pharmaceutical companies to mine profile data in order to develop targeted marketing campaigns. Is Facebook next?

Finally, while the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) restricts the way health care providers use and disseminate patients’ information, consumer health websites and online patient communities aren’t subject to its privacy provisions. In other words, there are no regulations guiding the privacy and use of medical information and data collected using social media tools! Essentially, this means that the persons who run online patient communities can do pretty much whatever they like with the medical and personal information that they collect!

As I stated at the beginning of the post, I am a social media enthusiast who subscribes to the notion that if used correctly, social media can help to better inform and improve the lives of people suffering from various disease. That said, I also believe that people who choose to participate in online communities MUST be fully informed about the potential uses of the personal information and data that they contribute. Until the Food and Drug Administration provides some regulatory guidance on the use social media to collect and disseminate medical information patients will be at the mercy of the entities that run online patient communities. Let’s hope that they see fit to “do the right thing.”

Until next time...

Good Luck and Be Careful What You Say Out There!!!!!!!!!

 

Transcending the Transition from Academia to Industry

It is becoming  increasingly difficult for undergraduate and graduate students to secure entry-level jobs at biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. This is because these students lack the appropriate training and qualifications for entry-level jobs at pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Unfortunately, most undergraduate and graduate programs do not offer training to their students in drug development, quality systems and manufacturing. The is likely due to: 1) lack of well informed and qualified faculty members to initiate and develop specialized curricula on these topics and 2) a belief that job training is the responsibility of prospective employers, not academic researchers. Unless substantive curricular change is made to existing academic programs, the road to employment for many students will continue to be bumpy and fraught with difficulty.

In contrast with academic research, industrial research is highly regulated and guided by legally-enforceable rules and regulations, e.g., Current Good Laboratory Practices (cGLP), Current Good Clinical Practices (cGCP) and Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP). These rules and guidelines were created by regulatory agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure the development of safe and efficacious products. In recent years, the FDA has begun to enforce these rules and regulations more strictly. As a result, many life sciences companies now require that prospective employees understand cGLP, cGCP and cGMP guidelines and how to apply them in industrial laboratory settings. Because these rules and regulations are specific to industry and relatively unknown in academia, most academically-trained job candidates fail to qualify for these industrial jobs. Finally, over the past five years, there has been a growing emphasize on the importance of so-called "soft skills" e.g., good oral written and communication skills, teamwork, professional behavior, etc. in existing and prospective employees. These skills are increasingly important as life sciences companies grow larger, more diverse, and increasingly multidisciplinary in their approach to drug discovery and development.

Unfortunately, few academic programs develop these skills in a systematic way; this failure hinders the ability of students to obtain industrial jobs. Although the transition from academia to industry can be difficult, students can do several things to improve their odds. First, take advantage of available resources in preparing your resume and learning how to interview for an industrial position. A well written, carefully crafted resume can result in an interview, and a professional interviewing style can increase the likelihood of a job offer.

Working with a skilled and well-connected professional recruiter may also increase the probability of securing an industrial job. Second, many community colleges and several companies now offer specialized training in quality systems, regulatory affairs (cGLP, cGMP and cGCP) and other areas.

Finally, there is no better way to get an industrial job than to have previous industrial experience. To get industrial experience, seek out training opportunities that include an industry internship as part of the curriculum. Some biotech and pharmaceutical companies may offer volunteer opportunities, and some have postdoctoral positions.

Until next time...

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

 

Educating Pharma About Social Media

We scientists tend to be a serious bunch who often hard on difficult projects with lofty goals and expectations. However, like most other people, many of us have well developed senses of humor and enjoy a good laugh from time to time.

While working on my recent post on pharma and social media, I came across a post on Wendy Blackburn's blog, epharma Rx, that showcased a clever and well-crafted video created by her agency InTouchSolutions to help pharma companies overcome fears about social media.  I think BioJobBlog readers will enjoy it because it uses scientific principles (presumably understood by life sciences companies employees) to poke fun and educate pharma executives about social media 

Hat tip to Wendy and the InTouchSolutions Team

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!!!!

Advanced Learning Institute's "Social Media and Pharma Conference" Roundup

Earlier this week, I attended Advanced Learning Institute’s (ALI) conference “Social Media and Pharma” that was held in Princeton, NJ. The conference was chaired and expertly moderated by Bill Evans, a Senior Vice President and Partner, Digital at Fleishman Hillard. Bill’s insights and command of the social media space were outstanding and helped to keep the conference moving forward and always on point (he also knows a lot about selling old iPhone on EBay—thanks Bill). 

All of the talks that I attended were outstanding and I have to say that the conference was one of the best organized and most focused conferences on the topic of social media and pharma that I attended to date! This is because Bill, a former technology turned business guy, organized the meeting around a conversational “how to” theme rather than allow presenters to talk about their cool Facebook pages, Twitter feeds and blogs. Instead, he asked presenters to share with conference participants their ideas, strategies and experiences associated with implementation of their social media campaigns and programs. 

Two of my favorite presentations were delivered by pharma companies; Pfizer and Novo Nordisk. This was somewhat surprising because historically many pharma companies had to be reluctantly forced into the social media fracas.

The Pfizer presentation, “A Common Sense Approach for Integrating Social Media into Your Traditional Communications and Marketing Plans: A Roadmap for Success” was skillfully delivered by Paul Dyer from WCG (the agency that worked with Pfizer on its social media campaign) and Pfizer’s Kate Bird. Paul, who previously worked with social media in the consumer product industry, offered more facts and statistics that I ever knew existed for social media. With this as a backdrop, Kate went on to describe how Pfizer, a late entrant to the social media scene, leveraged this information to create one of the better social media campaigns launched to date by a pharmaceutical company.

The Novo Nordisk presentation, “How to Use Twitter to Deliver Measurable Results For Your Organization” was delivered by Lois Kotkoskie and Ambre Morley was a veritable road map on how to use Twitter to delivered branded messages about pharmaceutical products. For those of you who may not know, Novo Nordisk is the only company to date that has delivered a so-called “branded pharmaceutical tweet” in the Twitterverse. The now infamous tweet about Novo’s diabetes product Levemir s was delivered by race car driver and Novo spokesperson Charlie Kimball.

Despite this bold and unprecedented foray into branded pharmaceutical tweets, Novo hasn’t yet run afoul of regulators at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) This is because Ambre, who is a marketing and PR professional, understood early on in the process, that in order to succeed and stay off of FDA’s radar, she would have to work closely her company’s regulatory affairs department. This is where Lois came in; she is a bona fide pharmaceutical regulatory affairs expert who in addition to her understanding of the arcane regulations guiding pharmaceutical advertising, has a well-developed sense of humor (frequently absent in pharmaceutical regulators) and is seemingly less risk-adverse than a majority of her peers.

It was easy to see that Ambre and Lois work very well together (sometimes I thought I was watching an Abbott and Costello comedy routine). Undoubtedly this is the likely reason why Novo’s diabetes-focused Twitter campaign was so well crafted, executed and in the end, successful. The take away lesson from the Novo experience is that pharma marketing and communication professionals interested in designing and implementing regulatory-compliant social media campaigns must include legal and regulatory representatives in the discussion.

Honorable mentions go to the presentations offered by Ken Rashbaum, Doug Levy and Peter Pitts who mainly talked about some of the legal, regulatory and privacy concerns voiced by pharmaceutical companies about the use of social media. An important issue that nobody at the meeting was prepared to discuss was the possible use of social media for pharmaceutical adverse event (AE) reporting. Generally speaking, conference participants were reticent to address this issue because most thought it would be difficult to have meaningful discussion in the absence of any regulatory guidance on this topic.

As many of you may know, the FDA held public hearings on the use of social media for various purposes in the life sciences industry late last fall. At present, it isn’t clear when the agency will issue that much anticipated guidance.

This past week’s “Social Media and Pharma” conference was the second event produced by ALI on this topic. Based on the attendance and enthusiastic response to the meeting, I suspect that ALI may be planning future events on social media and pharma. If this proves to be the case, then I highly recommend that you attend one or more of them!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!!!

 

Japan's Astellas to Hire 300 New Sales Reps (in China)

Astellas, Japan’s second largest pharmaceutical company, yesterday announced that it will hire at least 300 new pharma sales reps in China as part of its ambitious plan to increase its global revenue stream by 17 per cent over the next five years.

Documents released by the company indicate that it expects sales to double in China by March, 2015 emphasizing the fact that emerging markets will likely drive the future growth of the pharmaceutical industry. Astellas hopes to expand the indications for Prograf, its top selling organ transplantation medication to include rheumatoid arthritis, lupus nephritis, ulcerative colitis and myasthenia gravis.

Earlier this month, Astellas revealed that it would purchase NY-based OSI pharmaceuticals for $4.0 billion. The purchase will provide Astellas with its first approved cancer drug (OSI’s Tarceva) and allow Astellas to establish a firmer footing in the US pharmaceutical and biotechnology markets.

Total worldwide net sales of Tarceva for 2009, were approximately $1.2 billion and OSI's share of those revenues were $359 million. In the first quarter of 2010, Tarceva sales grew 10%

While hiring 300 reps in China may be good for the Chinese economy, the OSI deal will likely result in job cuts and further exacerbate the growing unemployment rate in the New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania region.

Unlike the US, there seems to be a growing need for pharmaceutical and biotechnology R&D and sales employees in China and other parts of Asia. To that end, I hear that Beijing and Shanghai are lovely this time of year!!!!

Until next time...

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

 

Big Pharma is Betting on Emerging Markets to Lift Profits

It is no secret that growth of the pharmaceutical industry has slowed to single digits in the past five years or more. In fact, many experts don’t expect there to be double digit growth in this sector for a long time. Instead, future robust growth of the pharmaceutical industry is expected to take place in emerging markets including India, China, Brazil, South Africa and others. This is because the economies of these countries are booming and the middle class in these nations continues to rapidly grow. 

While branded prescriptions drugs once dominated Western markets, it is likely that generics or branded generic products will be the major players in emerging markets. Because of this, big pharma companies such as GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi Sankyo and most recently Abbott Laboratories have either purchased or crafted large marketing deals with smaller regional drug manufacturers.

Daiichi Sankyo paid $4.0 billion in 2008 for a major share of India’s Ranbaxy Laboratories and GlaxoSmithKline earlier this year acquired exclusive rights to over 100 products produced by Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, another Indian drug maker with a broad reach in emerging markets.

Today, Abbott Laboratories announced that it would purchase the healthcare business of Piramal Healthcare Ltd, one of India’s largest purveyors of branded generics for $3.72 billion. When the deal closes, Abbott will inherit the rights to about 350 brands and trademarks and a manufacturing plant in northern India. Also, Piramal agreed to a six year non-compete agreement for branded generics. The remaining parts of Piramal include a custom manufacturing business, over-the-counter products, vitamins, diagnostic devices and Piramal Life Sciences a drug discovery company.

The company, which has India’s largest sales force, would become a subsidiary of Abbott Laboratories and employ about 7,500 workers. Last week, Abbott said it would license at least 24 products from Zydus Cadila to sell in emerging markets. Analysts estimate that emerging markets account for 20 percent of Abbott’s business. The Piramal and Zydus Cadila deals suggest that Abbott maybe the company to reckon with in emerging markets in India and elsewhere.

 Until next time...

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

 

BioConference Live Returns on June 2&3, 2010

Last year, the first BioConference Live event was held. For those of you who may not have heard about BioConference Live, it is a free, online biotechnology and pharmaceutical event that features keynote speakers and live presentations, a lobby and even a virtual exhibit hall. The success of the inaugural meeting has prompted the conference promoters to organize a second BioConference Live event which will be held on June 2 & 3.

The June event will feature over 50 live keynote and seminar presentations and include topics such as cancer research, drug discovery, cell biology, genomics, proteomics, lab automation, bioinformatics, and infectious diseases. Some of the featured speakers include:David Wolf M.D. NASA Astronaut, Steven Burrill CEO of Burrill & Company, Kevin Hrusovsky, CEO of Caliper Life Sciences, and Paul Schoemaker, Ph.D. Chairman and CEO Decision Strategies International, Inc. To view the complete BioConference Live agenda click here. For a complete list of speakers click here

To learn more, and register for free, visit http://bioconferencelive.com/. If you register, attend, and recommend 3 friends, you can win an iPad.

I hope to see you (sort of) at the conference.

Until next time….

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

 

More Biotechnology Industry Consolidation: Astellas Pharmaceuticals to Acquire OSI Pharmaceuticals

Melville, NY-based OSI Pharmaceuticals, the maker of the cancer drug Tarceva and arguably one of the most successful biotechnology companies in the New York metropolitan area, has finally agreed to be purchased by Japan’s Astellas Pharma.

Earlier this year, Astellas announced a hostile takeover bid for OSI. After a two month long battle, the OSI board agreed to sell the company to Astellas for $4.0 billion. According to the terms of the deal, OSI shareholders will receive $57.50 per share; a 55 per cent premium to the company’s share price in February. The price represents a 10.5 percent increase over Astellas’ original proposal of $52 per share.

Tarceva is OSI’s only product but sales last year reached about $1.2 billion. The drug has been approved to treat various cancers including non-small cell lung cancer (second line treatment) and first-line advanced pancreatic cancer. OSI has been trying to garner approval for Tarceva to treat other types of cancer in recent years. While sales of Tarceva have been growing annually, OSI’s new drug pipeline has been relatively thin.

OSI was founded in 1983 and is one of the oldest biotechnology companies in New York State. The company currently employs about 524 people. It is not clear what effect, if any, the acquisition may have on those jobs.

Astellas Pharma is Japan’s largest pharmaceutical company which has been on something of a buying spree to enhance its oncology portfolio and expand its US presence. Last year, Astellas lost a battle to acquire CV Therapeutics which was ultimately purchased by California-based Gilead Sciences for $1.4 billion.

Over the past few years Japanese pharmaceutical companies, flush with cash, have been aggressively pursuing American biotechnology companies with oncology expertise. Two years ago, Takeda Pharmaceuticals purchased Boston-based Millennium Pharmaceuticals for $8.8 billion to gain access to Velcade, its multiple myeloma drug and oncology drug pipeline.

The recent Japanese biotechnology buying spree is reminiscent of the Japanese real estate grab in the late 1980s which resulted in the sale of some of America’s iconic buildings including Rockefeller Center and the Empire State Building. Ironically, those buildings are again owned by American companies and private equity groups! 

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

 

"Social Media for Pharma Conference" in Princeton, NJ on May 24 & 25

The Advanced Learning Institute will be hosting a conference entitle Social Media for Pharma on May 24 & 25, 2010 at the Hyatt Hotel in Princeton, NJ. Presenters include representatives from AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, NovoNordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Lundbeck, Porter Novelli, the National Organization for Rare Diseases and many others. 

 

Topics to be covered include:

  • Developing a social media strategy that works for your organization
  • Update on regulatory guidance for social media
  • Managing on going regulatory challenges for social media
  • Building a business case and demonstrating ROI for social media platforms
  • Creating a stronger sense of community and brand recognition using social media
  • Monitoring customer feedback and satisfaction
  • Determine the right mix of social media for your organization
  • Latest innovations in social media
  • Using twitter to turn your employees into stakeholders into brand ambassadors

and much more!

An agenda for the meeting can be found here. Mention BioJobBlog or BioCrowd and get $200 off the registration fee. For more information please contact melissa@aliconferences.com

I hope to see you at the meeting…it ought to be a good one!!!!!!!!!!

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Tweeting, Blogging, Podcasting etc etc!!!!!

 

Pharma Folks Who Tweet

Ashley over at pharmacytechniciancertification.net sent me a list of the so-called top 50 twitter feeds for pharmaceutical industry news.

While the list is a solid one, @BioJobBlog @eyeonfda and @pharmalot—three outstanding feeds-- were noticeably absent from it. Further, most of the feeds that made the list are managed by marketing and advertising professionals who either run consulting businesses or work for life sciences companies or healthcare agencies—not that there is anything wrong with that!

Nevertheless, the list is comprehensive, informative and covers everything you need to know to feed your pharma industry news habit.

Best Professional Twitter Feeds for Pharma News

These Twitter feeds are from those who make pharma their business.

1. Medicine Community : Also known as Drug Info, this group is based in Westlake Village, California. They are part of The People’s Medicine Community. Visit to share your drug related questions and stories anonymously in the free community. Links to answers are also featured.

2. FDA Drug Info : Get the latest headlines on pharmaceuticals from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration here. Although the FDA has several Twitter accounts, this one is specifically for pharma. Information, recalls, and more are featured.

3. Pharma TV : PharmaTelevision is the online TV channel for the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. It offers insights and features interviews with industry leaders. Latest tweets are often headlines of interest.

4. Pharma Twits : Twitter and pharma combine seamlessly here. Thoughts on the industry and more are given from an anonymous user. Items of interest are often featured.

5. Café Pharma : Based in Atlanta, this Twitter user takes a more informal approach. Headlines of interest, as well as links, are most commonly shared.

6. Pharma Deals : See the deals going on behind the scenes by stopping here. It is one of the world’s most comprehensive pharmaceutical and biotechnology deals databases. Acquisitions, mergers, and the like are tweeted on.

7. eDrugSearch : This Twitter feed is from a site of the same name aiming to run a comparison shopping network for prescription drug buyers. They also offer a social network. Visit regularly for drug news and money-saving tips.

8. Fierce Pharma : Based in Washington, D.C., there are over 50,000 subscribers to this site’s newsletter. Get the latest in rulings, recalls, and much more here. Tweets come several times a day.

Best Individual Twitter Feeds for Pharma News

The below guys and gals also have something to say about the pharmaceutical business.

9. Jon M. Rich : Stop here for the Twitter feed of a former pharma guy. Jonathan now preaches the digital world to every pharma and healthcare company that will listen. You can listen by giving him a follow.

10. Pharma Guy : John Mack is the author of a popular blog on pharma marketing. He is also a pundit, credit, and publisher of pharma news. John recently got an iPad and tells all about it.

11. Steve Woodruff : His focus is pharma along with marketing, eHealth, training, and more. He also tweets about things of interest in the New Jersey area.

12. Shwen Gwee : He is the founder of sites such as Social Health and Social Pharmer. He often tweets his own opinions on pharma. Shwen also replies to follower’s tweets.

13. Pharma Expert : Click here for the Twitter feed of someone who thinks “medicine is cool.” She is a drug expert- working in the pharmaceutical industry. Tweets are often links to items of interest.

14. Sarah Morgan : Visit for the Twitter account of an official PR director for a pharma company. Sarah is also a social media “opinionista, writer, and questioner.” She often takes the time to answer questions.

15. Nat Bourne : From Toronto, Nat is in the medical, pharma, and marketing business. She is also a work at home mom with a toddler and newborn. Tweets are both on professional and personal life.

16. Why Dot Pharma : Silja is from Switzerland. She believes pharma can create better patient-focus through social media. Tweets are occasionally in English and link to items she enjoys.

17. Wendy Blackburn : She is a blogger and digital marketer who is focused on pharma. Wendy is also the EVP for IntouchSol digital marketing agency. Visit to get retweets and links.

Best Science Twitter Feeds for Pharma News

The below Twitter accounts focus on the scientific side of pharma.

18. Pharma Biotech : Get all things in biology technology with a visit. Pharma is often the focus of tweets. Several posts a day include the latest headlines.

19. Richard G. Lanzara : He is a entrepreneurial scientist and pharmacologist. Interests include how our senses and receptors work, as well as what follows. Tweets center around science and the occasional retweet.

20. Eye for Pharma : The site exists to assist the pharma industry in creating real patient value, care, and service. It is an excellent choice for those employed inside the pharma industry. Tweets are often replies to followers.

21. Pharma Info : Stop here for pharma information, comments, and trends. Science often includes reading recommendations on both pharma and health.

22. Pharma Fraud News : Want to see the ugly side of pharma? Then stop here for the Twitter feed for whistleblowers. It focuses on a million dollar reward program for those willing to report fraud.

23. Fierce Biotech : Click for one of the largest and most active biotech news readership in the world. Written by Maureen Martino, the site contains the daily monitor of the biotech industry. Tweets often link to related items.

24.Center Watch : Visit to get a global source of news, directories, proprietary market research, and analysis for clinical trials professionals and patients. Pharma patients will especially enjoy this feed for letting them be part of the scientific solution.

Best Company Twitter Feeds for Pharma News

Get pharma news straight from the companies that produce the with these Twitter feeds.

25. Pfizer News : This is the news feed for one of the most well known pharma companies in the nation. They apply science and global resources to improve health and well-being at every stage of life. Jen Kokell, GMR, of the company is your host.

26. Novartis : They provide healthcare solutions that address the evolving needs of patients and societies worldwide. Tweets often focus on the latest pharma news. Links to full stories are also included.

27. Boehringer : This company is based in Ingelheim, Germany. You can get international tweets here, or you can also follow just the ones for the U.S. by clicking @boehringer US.

28. Access Pharma : Stop here for the Twitter feed of an emerging pharmaceuticals company. Their focus is on oncology and diabetes. Announcements are often featured on Twitter.

29. Astra Zeneca US : Get news for this pharma company’s business in the United States here. The biopharmaceutical company produces drugs such as Nexium and others. They generally link to items of interest.

30. Pharma Ventures : This company is a global corporate finance and transactions advisory firm. They specialize in deal making within the life science and healthcare sectors. Get the latest in deal news with a follow.

31. Amgen : This is a leading human therapeutics company in the biotechnology industry. For more than 25 years, Amgen has tapped the power of scientific discovery and innovation to advance the practice of medicine. Announcements, links, and more are tweeted.

32. Pfizer : Unlike the above, this Twitter feed sticks mostly to tweets for employees. However, it is still a useful follow for those who want a behind the scenes look at pharma.

33. Bayer Health Care : This company is probably best known for its various types of aspirin. The company also combines the global activities of the divisions: animal health, Bayer Schering pharma, consumer care, and medical care. Updates and the occasional non-English tweet are featured.

34. Novartis Trials : Find out more about the pharma trials this company has available. Must follow to get unprotected tweets.

35. Vertex Pharma : Stop here for the official Twitter channel for Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. Tweets are sparse, but the main site has loads more.

36. McNeil Recall : This pharma company focuses exclusively on product recalls. Lori Dilginoff, the PR rep and others, maintain this account.

Best Health Twitter Feeds for Pharma News

The below Twitter feeds focus on both health and pharma.

37. Phil Baumann : He is the founder of RN Chat. Also a blog author, he focuses on healthcare, technology, pharma, and hilarity. Retweets and answers are often featured.

38. Simple Heal : Stop here for the Twitter feed of an anonymous doctor. He believes clinical outcomes dictate the adoption of new medicine, the knowledge that could be critical to patient, doctor, researcher, investor, and regulator alike. Tweets often link to items of interest.

39. Sky Pen : This Twitter user is also known as Fabio Gratton. From California, he is the co-founder and CIO of Ignite Health. The company is passionate about health, digital, and social media. He often links to things that interest him.

40. Matthew Herper : Get the Twitter feed for this “Forbes” reporter with a click. He focuses on covering both science and medicine. Gene therapy, pharma, latest innovations, and more are discussed.

41. Safety Nurse : Barbara Olson is a nurse with an engineer’s mind. She tweets on sensitive items that strike her fancy. Recent tweets were on boxed warnings.

42. Drug Savings : Learn the science behind saving at pharma with a visit here. It is part of Canadian Online Pharmacies. You can also save up to 80% on your purchases.

43. L2 : This is the Twitter feed of a marketing think tank based in New York. Founded by Scott Galloway, they bring together academics and pharma industry leaders to create innovative formulas for marketing success. Links are often featured.

Other Best Twitter Feeds for Pharma News

These users don’t tweet exclusively about pharma but are still worth a look.

44. Alex DC : Also known as Alex de Carvalho, he is a social media strategist. However, he has worked in the pharma business and even presented at the EyeforPharma eMarketing Summit. He is also a teacher.

45. Laurie DesAutels : She is a headhunting professional based in Houston, TX. Laurie also decided to start her own company to follow her passion for sourcing and recruiting. See what she has to say about that and more by following her.

46. Martino Chiaviello : He is the Group Art Supervisor at Vertiyo Health in New York. Martino also is a web designer, entrepreneur, video game addict, and more. Lists include social media, design, and pharma.

47. CLIO Awards : The CLIO Awards is one of the world’s most recognized global awards competition for advertising, design, and interactive. It is also awarded to pharma companies, and you can see which by having a look.

48. Sally Church : Also known as Maverick NY, she is part of Icarus Consultants. They specialize in pharma, biotech, and other related areas. Visit to get retweets, opinions, and more.

49. Roche : This company is based in Switzerland. Their focus is to answer to medical challenges by combining strengths in pharma and diagnostics to work towards making personalized healthcare a reality.

50. Khunadd : Also known as Wannee W, this Twitter user focuses on health food, food chemistry, herbal medicine, and pharma. With thousands of followers and interesting headlines, it is worth a visit.

Please be sure to consult a physician before following any of the advice read on the above 50 best Twitter feeds for pharma news. Only he or she has examined you, knows your history, and the interactions any new drugs can have with existing ones.

Until next time….

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!

 

The Pharmaceutical Industry's New Math

Those of us a certain age have all heard of the so-called new math—which by all accounts wasn’t much different than old math—that was suppose to revolutionize the way math was taught at the primary and secondary education levels. While new math may not have not have much different or better than old math from an academic perspective, pharmaceutical companies will have to reckon with the new math associated with the pricing of brand name prescription drugs if they want to remain competitive in the future.

According to statistics offered in a recent New York Times article on Teva Pharmaceuticals, the world’s largest generic drug manufacturer, generics now account for 75 per cent of the prescriptions filled in the United States. This figure is up 47 percent from a decade ago. Further, a recent study from IMS, the research firm that tracks prescription drug use, generic drugs saved the American healthcare system $734 billion between 1999 and 2008. These numbers, coupled with a paltry 25 per cent market share, suggest that brand name pharmaceutical companies must rethink the low volume, large margin pricing strategy that has guided big pharma for the past 50 years. 

As one Teva executive candidly put it, “If you are used to the fat margins of big pharma, it is hard to compete in the rough and tumble of price-cutting generics.” 

The push for wider adoption and use of generic pharmaceuticals and biologics (as compared with brand name drugs) suggests that there will likely be more belt-tightening at big pharma companies in the not-so-distant future.

Until next time..

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

 

Lilly Shows More Sales Reps the Door

Eli Lilly and Co. announced last Thursday that it plans on cutting 200 sales and marketing support jobs in its U.S. biomedicine group. More than half of those cuts will take place in Indianapolis, the corporate headquarters of the company. The cuts are the latest wave of the drugmaker's previously announced plans to chop 5,500 jobs worldwide by the end of 2011. The layoffs will be the largest since Lilly eliminated 200 jobs from its research laboratories in March.

Big pharmaceutical companies have been laying off marketing and sales reps for the past three years or so in response to lack of newly approved drugs and anticipated revenue losses from blockbuster drugs that are nearing patent expiry. According to a recent survey conducted by SDI Health the number of pharmaceutical sales reps has shrunk to roughly 81,780 in last year’s third quarter from 101,818 in 2005: a nearly 20 per cent. Further a recent post on the Pharmalot blog revealed that “last year, the number of docs willing to see most reps fell nearly 20 percent, the number of prescribers refusing to see most reps increased by half and the number of management-planned sales calls that were nearly impossible to complete topped 8 million” according to ZS Associates, which monitored interactions involving 500,000 physicians nationwide.

Declining revenues from brand name prescription drugs combined with the changing attitudes of physicians to sales reps suggest that marketing and sales jobs in the pharmaceutical industry may become scare in the future. However, as the biotechnology continues to mature, the need for sales reps with backgrounds in molecular biology and protein-based drugs will continue to increase.

While most physicians are very familiar and comfortable with small molecule prescription drugs, their understanding and familiarity with biotechnology drugs is surprisingly deficient. This suggests that PhD-trained life scientists, who are outgoing and don’t have problems “selling”, may want to consider careers in biotechnology sales or marketing.

Until next time…

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

 

 

Bristol-Myers Squibb Board Okays $3.0 Billion Stock Repurchase Program; Is BMS Preparing Itself for Sale?

Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) announced Tuesday that its board authorized the repurchase of up to $3 billion of its common stock.

The company said the buyback program has no expiration date and will take place over the next few years. Company spokespersons said the decision reflects Bristol-Myers' strong financial position, which included $9.8 billion in cash and marketable securities at the end of the first quarter.

While stock repurchase programs are common, BMS is steeling itself for the expected loss of substantial revenues beginning in 2011 due to patent expiry of its top selling anti-clotting medication Plavix. In the past year or so, the company has sold off a profitable medical device subsidiary (Convatec) and a consumer products company (Meade Johnson) to sure up its finances and improve stock share price. 

Long be rumored to be a takeover target, BMS has attempted to reinvent itself over the past few years as a “next generation biopharmaceutical company” through licensing agreements and acquisition of smaller biotechnology companies with promising technology platforms and near term new biotechnology products (Medarex). However, the loss of Imclone—the biotechnology company that developed the one of the top-selling colon cancer drugs called Erbitux—to rival drug maker Eli Lilly has significantly slowed the next generation initiative.

Stay tuned for all late-breaking events.

Until next time…

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

 

Resumes, Curriculum Vita and Cover Letters

After almost a week advising students about the difference between resumes and curriculum vita (for scientists there is no difference), academic vs. an industrial curricula vitae and cover letters at Experimental Biology this year, I came to two conclusions. First, all scientists should take a resume writing course. Second, there is no single resource to help students and postdocs figure out a way to navigate the sometimes treacherous waters of resume writing and cover letters.

Much to my surprise and delight, Monica Kerr, who is Director of Science Alliances at the New York Academy of Sciences, offered a link to a great resource developed by Harvard’s Office of Career Development. The document entitled “CVs and Cover Letters” offers ideas and samples of academic CVs and cover letters. Further, it provides insights into formatting and verb usage when constructing CVs and resumes. While the document does not address how to construct an industrial CV, it is one of the best resources that I know of for resume writing for life scientists.

Those of you looking who may be looking for advice and guidance about constructing industrial strength CVs can check out a post that I crafted for BioJobBlog a couple of years ago. Like the Harvard document it focuses on CV formats, verb usage and other job search related items.

Hat tip to Monica (and Harvard Office of Career Development)!

Until next time…

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

 

More Changes at Novartis

Earlier this year, Dan Vasella, the longtime CEO of the Swiss drug maker Novartis, announced that he was resigning his CEO position to assume a full time role as the Chairman of the company’s board of directors. Joe Jimenez, an American, was appointed as the new CEO.

Today, Novartis announced the departure of Ludwig Hanston, the CEO of the US pharma business unit for the past two years. In addition to his departure, four new business units will be formed and 250 employees will lose their jobs effective May 1, 2010.

The four new business units are being formed to more accurately reflect the needs of patient populations. The new business units include 1) Primary Care, 2) Multiple Sclerosis, 3) Psychiatry/Neuroscience and 4) Respiratory/Transplant/Infectious Disease.

For a more detailed explanation of the changes taking place at Novartis please read the post on today’s Pharmalot blog.

Hat tip to Ed.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Pharma Layoffs Continue Unabated

Pfizer today announced that it would lay off another 123 workers at its Pearl River, NY manufacturing and R&D site.

The workers in the facility's research and development division will lose their jobs by early July according to a company spokesperson. He added "There may be some additional positions eliminated over the course of 2010, but this is the last major wave that will be announced.”

This brings to 601 the total number of layoffs at the site. The cuts are part of a global restructuring Pfizer announced in November, weeks after acquiring Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. The company has yet to decide the fate of the plant's manufacturing arm. If it is shuttered, that could lead to more layoffs

In other news, lesser known KV Pharma said it would shed 289 workers or 42 percent of its workforce. KV already had reduced its staff from 1,700 in 2008 to about 680 as of Feb. 28. The company recently shut down its generics subsidiary Ethex Corp. after the company pleaded guilty to criminal charges for not disclosing problems with two of its drugs and agreed to pay $27.6 million in fines and restitution.

While the US government and financial analysts claim that the economy is show signs of improvement, the layoffs at pharma and biotech companies continue. Only time will tell if we have truly turned a corner during this economic downturn.

Hat tip to the Pharmalot blog!

Until next time...

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

 

Another Pharma List: Does Size Really Matter?

Ed Silverman who runs the outstanding Pharmalot Blog, today posted a 2009 list of the world’s top 20 pharmaceutical companies. The list was compiled by IMS Health and placement was based on revenues generated from 2009 prescription drug sales.  The numbers in parentheses represent the percent change from the previous year.

FYI, the Pfizer-Wyeth and Merck-Schering Plough acquisitions weren’t included whereas the Roche-Genentech acquisition was. Also, it is interesting to note that Teva, the world’s largest generic drug manufacturer came in at number 11and exhibited the greatest increase in sales in 2009. Expect the Israeli drug giant to move into the top ten next year as generic drug sales continue to out pace those of branded products.

  1. Pfizer - $41.7 billion - (0.8)
  2. Novartis - $36.7 billion - 7.0
  3. Sanofi-Aventis - $35.1 billion - (3.3)
  4. GlaxoSmithKline - $34.3 billion - (3.4)
  5. AstraZeneca - $33.2 billion - (7.8)
  6. Roche - $31.3 billion - (8.6)
  7. Johnson & Johnson - $26.9 billion - (6.6)
  8. Merck - $25.0 billion - (4.1)
  9. Eli Lilly - $19.6 billion - (8.3)
  10. Abbott - $19.4 billion - (5.5)
  11. Teva - $15.7 billion - (12.3)
  12. Bayer - $15.4 billion - (3.9)
  13. Wyeth - $14.8 billion - (2.3)
  14. Amgen - $14.8 billion - (3.1)
  15. Boehringer - $14.6 billion - (10.4)
  16. Takeda - $14.4 billion - (2.1)
  17. Bristol-Myers - $14.2 billion - (5.8)
  18. Schering-Plough - $13.1 billion - (4.3)
  19. Daiichi Sankyo - $8.5 billion - (3.1)
  20. Novo Nordisk - $8.2 billion (11.6)

Hat tip to Pharmalot

Until next time…

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

 

Roche Will Cut 600 Jobs in New Jersey

Roche disclosed in a regulatory filing that it will plans to eliminate 500 positions in New Jersey by the end of this month, related to last year's acquisition of Genentech Inc., and plans to cut another 100 jobs in the state by June. While the cuts were expected after Roche acquired Genentech last year and announced it would move its US headquarters from Nutley, NJ to South San Francisco, it wasn’t clear how extensive the job loses would be. The company is closing down all manufacturing operations at the aging Nutley site.

This is more bad news for the State of New Jersey which has borne the brunt of the pharma downsizing trend that began in earnest about 4 years ago. As many of you may know, New Jersey has the highest concentration of pharmaceutical employees in the US. The loss of pharmaceutical jobs coupled with an enormous budget deficit suggests that it will be many years before New Jersey is able to recover from the economic downturn.

Roche, which had 2009 revenue of about $45.9 billion, employs more than 80,000 people worldwide.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (forget New Jersey)

 

Astra Zeneca Jumps on the Generic Drug Bandwagon

Astra Zeneca announced today that it has agreed to market 18 of Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd.’s branded generic drugs in 9 emerging markets, marking the U.K. drugmaker’s first generic-drug partnership.

Unlike some its competitors, Astra Zeneca is very vulnerable to generic competition as many of its best selling products such as Nexium for ulcers, the antipsychotic Seroquel and Crestor for cholesterol. are near patent expiry. Industry analysts expect the company to lose as much as 25% of its sales revenue to generic encroachment by 2014.

The company joins a growing list of big pharma companies including Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis and GlaxoSmithKline that view generics as a viable replacement for revenues lost to generic competition for it top selling brands.

Last year, GlaxoSmithKline entered into joint ventures with the generic manufacturers Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories (India) and Aspen Pharmacare Ltd (South Africa). Also, the company paid $246.5 million for Bristol-Myers Squibb’s Pakistan and Egypt drug units and acquired UCB’s drug portfolio in Africa, the Middle East, Asia Pacific and Latin America for $702 million; clearing signaling its intention to more aggressively pursue emerging global markets.

Likewise, Sanofi-Aventis bought Zentiva NV of the Czech Republic, Helvepharm AG of Switzerland, Medley SA of Brazil and Laboratorios Kendrick SA of Mexico to bolster its branded generics portfolio. The company also took control of the Indian vaccine and biologics manufacturer Shantha Biotechnics which suggest that Sanofi may be looking to biotech in the future.

Finally, Pfizer continues its pursuit of the financially-troubled German, generics giant Ratiopharm. Actavis of Iceland and the Israeli generics manufacturer Teva have also put in bids to purchase Ratiopharm. However, there are signs that Ratiopharm's board would prefer to be purchased by Pfizer rather than Teva or Actavis.

Look for other big pharma companies to enter into deals with or purchase branded or conventional generics manufacturers.

Until next time...

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

 

The Life Sciences Industry: China Begins to Turn Up the Heat

Until recently, there was little or no mention of business activity within the emerging Chinese life sciences industry. However, as the Chinese middle class continues to grow, the need and demand for pharmaceutical and biotechnology drugs (including vaccines and other biologics continues) to grow at a frenetic pace. Further, a growing abundance of US-trained scientists has allowed the Chinese life science industry to develop much more quickly than anticipated. Also, many major pharmaceutical companies like Merck, Roche and Novartis have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in China and have already established world class Chinese R&D facilities. Finally, unlike in most Western countries, the Chinese government controls roughly 80% of the pharmaceutical and biologics manufacturing that takes place in China. Together, this suggests that China has quietly established itself as a life sciences power to be reckoned with! To that end, there were two reports that came across the transom this morning that piqued my interest. 

The first report was about a company called Lotus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

"Lotus Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a growing developer and producer of prescription drugs and licensed national seller of pharmaceutical products in the People's Republic of China ("PRC"), reported the groundbreaking ceremony on March 9 to construct a new building complex on the grounds of its production facility in Beijing.

Officials of Beijing municipal and Chaoyang district governments, officers of the China State Food & Drug, and representatives of both state-owned and private pharmaceutical companies attended the ceremony. CEO, Zhongyi Liu, welcomed the guests. "After a year of planning, we are pleased to start the construction of the new building complex and expect to finish the construction by July, interior decoration by September and GMP certification by December of this year," he said. "This is a new page for Lotus' development and it will provide important impetus to profitable growth, which is anticipated to reach $150 million in annual sales during the first year after the facility, is fully operational."

The second reported on plans to build a venture-back, “private” contract manufacturing facility that specializes in biomanufacturing in metropolitan Beijing.

"AutekBio, Inc., SUMA Ventures and Beijing E-Town Harvest International Capital Management Corporation, a venture capital group from Beijing Municipal Government announced a joint investment of more than US$100m to develop a new contract manufacturing organization (CMO) for biopharmaceutical industry in China. This joint effort led by AutekBio represents strong interests from both private investment sector and government to establish world quality capability and capacity in biopharmaceutical manufacturing in China.

The new joint venture will build up a world class R&D and manufacturing center in southern Beijing to service international biologic developments, with combined volumes of bioreactors up to 20,000 liters in multiple production lines (trains). The firm will also benefit from financial, regulatory and other supports from the Chinese government for the biotech industry." 

It is becoming increasingly apparent that China has clearly set its sights on establishing itself as player on the global life sciences stage. After spending a week in China during the country’s preparation for the Beijing Games, I discovered that China can achieve any goal that it sets for itself in very short order.  

Until next time...  

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

 

Input on Social Media Regulatory Guidelines Continues to Trickle in from Life Sciences Companies and Trade Groups

Mark Senak, author of the incisive EyeonFDA blog and de facto watchdog of all things social media in the life sciences, has assiduously been tracking company and trade organization input to the docket for the Part 15 meeting on medical product promotion and the internet and social media. To date, according to Mark, the following companies and trade groups have officially submitted their comments and viewpoints to the docket                                                                                              

  1. Covidien
  2. Johnson & Johnson
  3. Bayer Healthcare
  4. Sanofi Aventis
  5. AstraZeneca
  6. Eli Lilly
  7. Medtronic
  8. Pfizer
  9. Abbott
  10. Novartis
  11. Genentech
  12. Sepracor
  13. Merck
  14. Medtronic
  15. Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO)
  16. PhRMA
  17. National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD)

As you may recall, industry input was lacking and surprisingly absent from the public hearings held by FDA on the topic earlier this year. While news analysts and bloggers were incredulous that companies didn’t actively participate in the earlier public hearings, this behavior is typical of life sciences companies that like to do things quietly and, when possible, behind closed doors. Ironically, this lack of transparency and inclination to secrecy is the antithesis of social media. Is it any wonder then, that life sciences companies are suspicious and wary of the impact that social media may have on their ability to conduct business?

Until next time...

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

Share/Bookmark

 

AstraZeneca Offers New Details About Its Global Layoff Plans

Ed Silverman, who runs the Pharmalot blog,reported today that AstraZeneca provided more details about its plan to layoff 8,000 employees or 12% of its workforce by 2014. 

According to the post, the company will R&D programs in thrombosis; acid reflux; ovarian and bladder cancers; systemic scleroderma; schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety; hepatitis C and vaccines (other than respiratory syncytial virus and influenza).

The company will shutter research facilities throughout the UK and Sweden and shed about 3,500 R&D jobs. About 550 jobs will be eliminated at AstraZeneca’s US headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware; adding to the massive numbers of unemployed pharmaceutical workers in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware region. The company is also looking for a buyer for its Arrow Therapeutics business.

AstraZeneca joins a growing number of big pharma companies that are jettisoning internal R& D programs in favor of licensing and merger and acquisition deals to sure up drug discovery pipelines. The lack of innovation in small molecule drug discovery and the loss in 2011 of patent protection for some of the industry’s largest blockbuster drug franchises is forcing big pharma companies to eliminate or outsource most of their R&D functions and capabilities to cut costs.  

I wish I could say that things will get better. But, the shift in the business model that has guided big pharma for close to 100 years is likely to be a permanent one. Now is the time to begin to consider alternative career paths!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (“Go West young man/man!”)

Share/Bookmark

 

BioJobBlog Makes a Top 50 Biotech Blog List

Emily Johnston of Medicareer sent me a message last night to inform me that BioJobBlog made its top 50 biotech blog list. While I don’t know much about Medicareer (nor does BioJobBlog have a business or financial relationship with the organization) this is a first for the blog and it is quite an honor to be included on the list. I guess spending hundreds of hours over the past three years writing blog posts is actually beginning to pay off!

A quick perusal of the list reveals some very interesting and useful biotechnology blogs that are worth reading. And, surprisingly, there are a couple of blogs on the list that I previously didn’t know about.

Hat tip to Medicareer!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Blogging

 

Economic Recovery: US Contract Biomanufacturing Companies Are Experiencing an Upswing

For the past decade or more, small to mid-sized biotechnology companies had been outsourcing production of their preclinical and clinical protein-based products to Asian contract manufacturing organizations (CMOs). This was because manufacturing and labor costs were lower and product quality was consistent with Western standards and requirements. However, the recent economic down turn coupled with rising prices at Asian CMOs (mainly driven by increasing labor and project management costs) has forced many small to mid-sized companies to rely again on American CMOs to manufacture their products. Unlike cash-rich, larger companies, US small to midsize companies generally lack the financial resources and personnel to effectively manage operations in Asia. Many industry analysts contend that the lower initial costs of Asia-based companies are usually offset by the money and resources need to oversee a project.

While business returning from Asia improved the financial outlook for some American CMOs, 2009 was a bad year for most firms that service small to mid-sized pharma and biotech companies. However, industry analysts expect 2010 to be better than 2009. More importantly, the return of biomanufacturing to the US may signal the beginning of a new trend in the biomanufacturing outsourcing industry.

Until next time....

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

 

Spurring Innovation

American competitiveness in engineering, technology and science. Unfortunately, while American competitiveness and innovation in these areas continues to wane, little has been done (except talking) about it! Yesterday, Intel and 24 venture capital funds announced that they plan to invest $3.5 billion in American startups and early stage ventures over the next two years. Further, in addition, several of America’s leading technology companies including Google, Cisco Systems, Intel Microsoft and 13 others pledged to add as many as 10,500 jobs into 2010—mainly by hiring Americans graduating from colleges with degrees in computer science and engineering.

The initiative, named the Invest in America Alliance was formed in response to “steadily declining long-term investments in education, technology and human capital” that has been taking place in the US for past 20 years or more. Put simply, the American education system is not training enough qualified individuals to allow the US to compete with other emerging technology and engineering powerhouses that include China, India Finland, Korea and the Netherlands. 

According to Robert Compton, a venture capitalist, entrepreneur and education enthusiast “Fewer than 10 percent of college graduates in the US have engineering degrees, compared with more than one-third in India and China and more foreign-born graduates of US universities are returning to their home countries.” For those of you with degrees in math and science (and you base your calculations on population size), the magnitude of the problem (for Americans anyway) is glaringly obvious. Compton went on to say what many others have been thinking for a while, “Early indicators are that we are not the center of innovation anymore. It is shifting to the East.” And he may be right! Based on surveys conducted by the World Intellectual Property Organization in the last year, patent filings increased 30 percent in China while declining 11 percent in the US.

While the Invest in America Alliance appears to be a great public relations opportunity for the companies and venture firms that are participating in it, its critics doubt whether investing more money in technology startups is going to fix the ongoing problem. Education analysts contend that a better and cheaper solution may be changing US immigration laws so that foreign students who train in the US are allowed to remain in the country after they complete their training. Other naysayers contend that most of the venture money committed by the alliance would have likely gone to American startups anyway (US based venture firms already invest 70 percent of their money in American start ups) and that 10,500 new jobs isn’t enough to make a dent in the US unemployment rolls.

Like the technology industry, a decade of wrong-head immigration policies coupled with a waning American interest in science has begun to jeopardize the US dominance in the life sciences. Further these trends are largely responsible for the massive layoffs and unrelenting outsourcing of pharmaceutical R&D jobs to foreign countries.

Toothless or not, the Invest in America Alliance shows that engineering and technology industry leaders are willing to cooperate with one another and get behind an initiative that raises public awareness about America’s waning competitiveness in these fields. Perhaps,   pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices and diagnostic companies ought to take a page out of the Alliance’s play book to similarly insure the future innovation and competitiveness of the American life sciences industry.

Until next time...

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

 

Branded Generics: Something Old, Something New?

Earlier this week, an article appeared in the NY Times Business section heralding the entry of several large pharmaceutical companies into the branded generics industry. For those of you who may not know, generic drugs are lower cost versions of brand name prescription drugs that have lost patent protection. Generic prescription drugs are usually much cheaper than their brand name counterparts but generally deliver the same therapeutic effects as the branded product. In most cases, so-called “commodity generic drugs” are not branded and sold to consumers by their chemical names. A good example of a commodity generic drug is the anti-depressant sertraline HCl; which Pfizer sells under the brand name Zoloft. Pfizer still manufactures and sells Zoloft but Zoloft lost patent protection several years ago and a generic version of the active ingredient, sertraline HCl, is now available to consumers. Because sertraline HCl is much cheaper than Zoloft, pharmacists almost always substitute prescriptions for Zoloft with sertraline HCl. This is perfectly acceptable because sertraline HCl was approved by the US Food and Drug administration with an AB rating which means that sertraline HCl is biologically equivalent to Zoloft.

Unlike commoditized (no-name) generics, branded generics are off-patent prescription drugs that are sold to consumers—as the name implies—under a brand name. Typically, because these products are “branded” and actively marketed by manufacturers they are sold at higher prices than equivalent no-name generics. This is because consumers are generally willing to pay more for drugs that are manufactured by well known and trusted companies as compared with no-name generics which are usually produced by lesser known or unidentified manufacturers.

Branded generics are not a new or novel concept. They were previously championed by a number of generics manufacturers, most notably Barr Laboratories, which was recently purchased by the Israeli generics giant TEVA. In the past, when pharma embraced the blockbuster drug business model, drug manufacturers built in revenues— that eventually would be lost through patent expiry—into the price of their top selling drugs. This allows drug companies to maximize ROI early in a drug’s life cycle years before patent expiry Studies have shown that branded prescription drugs can lose as much as 90% of their original value two years after the introduction of generic equivalents. Consequently, because of drastically diminishing financial returns after patent expiry, it didn’t make economic sense to continue to promote and support a brand that was facing generic competition. Put simply, the company made its money on the drug and it is time to move on. 

However, the emergence in recent years of an affluent middle class in developing markets like China, India, Brazil, Eastern Europe and elsewhere is causing branded pharmaceutical companies to reconsider their generics strategy. In these markets, many people frequently pay out of pocket for their medicines but cannot afford to pay for the expensive brand name drugs. Also, in some emerging markets, where the threat of low quality or counterfeit prescription drugs may be high, consumers who can afford to purchase medicines are willing to pay more for drugs manufactured by well known and respected companies. Finally, IMS Health estimates that close to $89 billion in US drug sales alone will be lost to generic competition over the next five years or so.

In the absence of any new blockbuster drugs on the horizon, many big pharma companies have been scrambling to acquire or enter into relationship with established regional generic manufacturers. For example, GlaxoSmithKline recently bought a stake in Aspen a South African generics manufacturer and entered into an agreement with India-based Dr. Reddy’s laboratory to sell generic products in Asia and other emerging markets. Likewise, in the last year, Pfizer created an off-patent generics division (products are sold under Greenstone label which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer) and signed agreements with three Indian companies to sell their products in the US and other markets. These deals added about 200 products to Pfizer’s new generics portfolio. Further, Pfizer recently announced that the Greenstone brand has become the world’s seventh largest generics seller. In addition, Pfizer is expected to make a formal bid to purchase the financially-troubled German generics manufacturer Ratiopharm; one of Germany’s largest purveyor of generic drugs.

Not to be outdone by the competition, the French drug maker Sanofi-Aventis recently purchased Brazil-based Medley, a dominant player in the South American branded generics industry and Laboratorios Kendrik, a Mexican generics producer. Last year, the company also purchased Zentiva, a leading Czech generic manufacturer signally the company’s intention to move into financially-lucrative Eastern European markets.

Watson, one of the largest American generics manufacturers (which primarily operates in the US) recently purchased Arrow, a generic producer that operates in 20 different countries. Finally, Novartis, recognizing a business opportunity before most of its competitors, entered the generic market in 2003 following creation of Sandoz, a division of Novartis that manufactures and sells small molecule generic drugs and branded biosimilar products. Recently, Novartis purchased the German branded generics manufacturer Hexal, making it the world’s second largest generic drug manufacturer after Teva.

The entry of pharmaceutical companies into the generics business is allowing these companies to pursue a two-tiered business strategy in certain markets which is designed to preserve the long term value of their branded franchises. For example, companies can continue to sell their expensive name-brand drugs to the wealthy (or those that can afford them) and concurrently sell the more moderately priced branded generics which includes and over the counter products to the broader market. 

While some may lament the end of the blockbuster drug era, rising healthcare costs and generic competition is forcing big pharma to continue to explore novel and innovative strategies to reinvent itself.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try the generic industry; business is booming)

 

What Do You Think: Should FDA Have a Facebook Fan Page?

Mark Senak, social media enthusiast and author of the EyeonFDA blog, raised the question on his blog today as to whether or not the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ought to have a fan page on Facebook: the ever expanding, ubiquitous social media platform. He aptly points out that FDA has already created a channel on YouTube and has a twitter account. So, why not a fan page on Facebook, he asked.

While Mark and I agree on most things, I am not convinced that having an FDA fan page on Facebook would make a difference in the way in which FDA communicates with the American public. FDA is already behind on the social media curve and, as the FDA public hearings held late last year suggest, the agency is struggling with formulating regulatory guidelines for its use by drug and devices manufacturers. Might not creating a FDA fan page on Facebook be the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s (agency) back? 

Perhaps I am overreacting to the whole Facebook phenomenon and grossly under estimating the agency’s capabilities. But I simply don’t get Facebook!  At best, it is overwhelming, difficult to navigate and seemingly cluttered mindless chatter and people engaging in Mafia wars. There is no question that a fan page would increase FDA’s exposure and its “hipness quotient” but to what end? The agency already has trouble maintaining and managing its existing web assets (have you ever tried finding information at FDA.gov?). Adding a new website would simply mean more work for overworked and underpaid government employee who seemingly play by different rules than the outside world.

Don’t get me wrong. I am an avid social media enthusiast who believes that persons who engage in social media must be “all in” to be effective. Having said that, I believe that the agency would be better served if it works to improve the navigability and accessibility to information on its existing web assets. There is no question that building an agency fan page on Facebook may convince Americans that FDA gets “the whole social media thing.” But if the fan page doesn’t provide Americans with relevant and useful scientific, medical and regulatory information, then adding a FDA fan page to Facebook will do little more than increasing the heft of an already bloated social media platform whose utility and effectiveness is already beginning to wane.

In my experience, building a website or fan page is the easy part; continuing to populate the pages and sites with useful, meaningful and temporally-relevant content is the difficult part!

Hat tip to Mark for starting the conversation!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Considering a Career in Regulatory Affairs? A Fellowship at FDA Won't Hurt Your Chances

As many of you already know, I talk to a lot of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows who are disillusioned with the prospect of remaining in the laboratory for the rest of their lives. Frequently, students mention regulatory affairs as an alternate career option and ask me what type of training and skills are required to transit into a regulatory career. Unfortunately, regulatory affairs is an industry specific career and regulatory affairs training programs with the possible exceptions of the courses offered by the Regulatory Affairs Professionals Society (RAPS) and the Drug Information Association (DIA) (which can be costly) are not readily accessible to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. Consequently, I recommend that PhD-trained scientists who are interested in regulatory affairs check out employment opportunities at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This is because there is no better place than FDA to learn the “ins and outs” of regulatory affairs!

Until recently, jobs, fellowships and training programs at the agency were scarce. However, while reading an industry trade magazine I came across an ad (posted below) announcing fellowship opportunities for PhD level life scientists, healthcare professionals, pharmacists and even engineers(although they only need a bachelors degree to be eligible.

This is an opportunity for those interested in a regulatory affairs career to give it a shot! For more info visiting the agency’s website

Until next time...

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Fred Hassan Shares His Views on the Past, Present and Future of the Pharmaceutical Industry

I just received a phone call from UK-based Meettheboss.TV to give me advance notice of an interview that was conducted with Fred Hassan, the former CEO of Schering Plough, that will be shown tomorrow at the Meettheboss.TV website. Hassan stepped aside as CEO after Merck acquired Schering Plough for $41.1 billion late last year.

Mr Hassan is arguably one of the most respected and highly visible pharmaceutical executives in the industry. He sat down with Meettheboss.TV to share how he was able to turn around a dysfunctional and failing Schering Plough and restore its tarnished image.

“I joined a company in 1997 that was in great difficulty.  There has been a merger between a Swedish company and a U.S. company, and that merger had resulted in a lot of difficulties, I was brought in as a CEO from the outside to try to make this merger work.  I realized that the future growth product of this company has been compromised in a deal that had to be untangled.” Fred told Meettheboss.tv

In an uncharacteristically candid interview, Hassan also offers his personal insights and views on the challenges that the pharmaceutical industry faces in the future as traditional business models begin to change and new players enter the pharmaceutical industry space. 

Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.

Get Adobe Flash player

To watch the full interview, please visit Meettheboss.TV

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!!!!!

An Analysis of Social Networking Sites for Life Scientists

Mary Canady author of the Comprendia Blog recently analyzed the popularity (or lack thereof) of a number of social networking sites that were created for life scientists. It would seem that online social networking sites would be ideal for scientists because we are not known for our networking or social communication skills in real life. However, only a few of the more than 15 life sciences social networking sites started in the past two years are doing well based on the traffic and usage statistics cited by Mary in her post. 

While Mary’s analysis included most of the well known life science social networking sites, she failed to include BioCrowd, the networking site started by Vincent Racaniello and me. While BioCrowd does cater to life scientists, we intentionally expanded our network to include other bioprofessionals including medical writers, marketers, consultants, venture capitalists and even CEOs! After all, it takes a village to take an idea from concept to commercialization.

Hat tip to Mary for the insightful post!

Until next time...

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

PhRMA Shakeup: Au Revoir Billy Tauzin

Billy Tauzin, a former Congressman and high profile lobbyist, unexpectedly resigned as President of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, (PhRMA), a pharmaceutical industry lobby and trade organization. According to a report in today’s New York Times, his resignation resulted from internal disputes over PhRMA’s pact with the White House to trade political support for favorable terms in the proposed health care reform bill. The trade group issued a news release on Thursday night confirming Mr. Tauzin’s departure, effective June 30.

When he first took the helm at PhRMA in 2005, Tauzin’s publicly-stated goal was to improve the group’s image and reduce the “number of its enemies.” Prior to Tauzin’s arrival at PhRMA, it was an obscure lobbying group that was little more than a “rubber stamp” for the agenda set by pharmaceutical companies. Under Tauzin's tutelage, the trade group adopted a more progressive strategy and tried to set a new agenda for the pharmaceutical industry.

In exchange for favorable terms in the original Obama healthcare reform package, PhRMA spent more than $100 million on ads to promote the overhaul. But after healthcare reform stalled, some industry leaders felt the trade group had gone too far giving concessions and could lose on some important legislative issues without gaining the political protection it had sought.

Despite publicly accusing the White House of reneging on its original deal, Tauzin’s willingness and zeal to help to reform healthcare ultimately led to his demise. I suspect that the next person chosen to lead PhRMA will likely be a pharma insider willing to "tow the party line."  While I wasn’t originally keen on Tauzin’s appointment, he proved to be an extremely effective  leader, who unlike most of his PhRMA predecessors, was forward-thinking and had a clear vision for the future of an industry currently in transition.

Tauzin’s departure signals that many pharma executives believe that healthcare reform is dead and companies can continue with “business as usual.” While failed healthcare reform may be beneficial to big pharma in the short term, it ultimately may lead to pharmaceutical price control legislation. This is because—in the absence of healthcare reform— drug and devices prices will continue to skyrocket and  legislators will have little choice but to regulate and cap drug and devices prices.

Until next time,

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Layoff Alert: GlaxoSmithKline Reveals Jobs Will Be Eliminated at UK Facility

After announcing that it would lay off about 4,000 workers two weeks and then refusing to disclose which facilities would be affected,  the British drug maker, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) today revealed that several hundred workers at it Harlow, Essex  facility will lose their jobs. 

The Harlow facility, formerly the headquarters of SmithKlineBeecham which was taken over by Glaxo almost 10 years ago, is located 25 miles (40 km) northeast of London. Although not confirmed, as many as 380 of the 1,1150 employees at the facility may lose their jobs.

Stay tuned for more GSK layoff updates!

Until next time....

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Rare Disease Day: FDA to Offer Orphan Drug Development Workshop

A rare or orphan disease is defined in the US as one that affects fewer than 200,000 at any given time. It is estimated that there are 6000 to 8000 rare diseases in the world today. Because the number of patients afflicted with orphan diseases is so small, drug companies have historically been reluctant to invest money to discover and develop new treatments for them. The dearth of treatments for rare diseases induced Congress to pass the Orphan Drug Act in 1983 which provided market exclusivity, tax breaks and incentives and regulatory help for companies to development new drugs for orphan disease indications.

While many current blockbuster drugs including recombinant human insulin, growth hormone and erythropoietin originally garnered regulatory approval after receiving orphan status in the late 1980s, most big pharma and biotechnology companies (except Genzyme) largely abandoned orphan drug development until recently. The renewed interest in orphan drug development has been primarily driven by the demise of big pharma’s blockbuster business model that began in the early 2000s. The search for new, non-blockbuster drugs and fresh markets is what induced Pfizer, the world’s largest pharmaceutical company, to recently inked a multimillion dollar deal with Protalix Biotherapeutics, a small biopharmaceutical company developing a new treatment for Gaucher disease—an orphan indication.

Because of renewed interest and the ever increasing need for new orphan drugs, the FDA’s Office of Orphan Products Development is offering an Orphan Drug Designation Workshop that will provide a unique opportunity for all potential drug sponsors—including biotechnology companies, pharmaceutical firms and academic institutions—to learn about the application process for orphan drug designation.

The National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD) is a co-sponsor of the workshops, which will take place on February 25-26 at Keck Graduate Institute and August 3-4 at the University of Minnesota.

Participants are encouraged to bring specific product proposals for at least one candidate orphan drug that holds promise for the treatment of a rare disease. A significant portion of the workshop will be dedicated to preparing applications, including one-on-one guidance sessions with FDA staff members. FDA will keep product and disease information confidential.

Final applications can be submitted to the FDA at the close of each workshop. For information or to register:

FDA Workshop Brochure
Registration for the February Workshop

Finally, February 28th is Rare Disease Day. The event is sponsored by the EURODIS a European advocacy group that promotes awareness and research for rare diseases. NORD and Discovery Health are also sponsoring the day.

Until next time....

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

The Job Search: How to Stand Out in the Crowd

It goes without saying that the competition for jobs in the life sciences industry is extremely fierce. This means that job candidates must use whatever means possible to differentiate themselves from the hundreds, perhaps thousands, of others applying for the same job!

While I have written numerous posts on how job candidates can stand out from their peers, I discovered an insightful article that summarizes my advice in a single post. Like I said, there are no revelations here; just a convenient way to jog your memory as the job search slogs on!

Click here to read the post.

Until next time...

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

Share/Bookmark

Bristol Myers Squibb: Downsizing With a Twist

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).

2008 Total Compensation for BMS Executives
Name Title Compensation ($)
James Cornelius CEO/Chairman of the Board 25,037,768
Anthony Hooper Pharmaceutical Division President 6,047,495
Elliot Sigal Divisional President/CSO/Executive VP 9,643,489
Lamberto Anderottis COO/Executive VP 10,755,297

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!!!!!!!!!

Share/Bookmark

 

Is the Economy Really Improving? Astra Zeneca to Cut 8,000 Jobs

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

Share/Bookmark

 

The Job Slog: Several Challenging Interview Questions that Mid Career Bioprofessionals May Have to Answer

There is no question that job opportunities for recent life sciences undergraduates, graduate students and postdoctoral fellows are becoming increasingly difficult to find. While this is troubling, older, mid-career bioprofessionals who may be looking for new jobs and challenges are having a rougher go of it. This is because older employees generally cost more to hire and many employers mistakenly believe that seasoned employees make lack the drive and technological skills as compared with younger, less experienced jobseekers.

Whether or not these assumptions are true, the interview questions that older job candidates may be asked are likely to be different than those offered up to younger prospective employees. To that end, there was an informative “how to” blog post written by Shelbi Walker of Back to Work, Inc that offers older professionals some responses that older job candidate can use to answer challenging questions that they may encounter during a face-to-face job interview.

I listed some sample questions and acceptable possible responses to them below:

1.  You appear to be overqualified for this position. Won't you get bored?

Suggested Responses:

“You are an excellent company. You deserve excellence in employees."

“Experience is a great premium today.”

“There is a greater return on your money if I hit the ground running. Less training time.” 

“I always like for additional work to do to prevent from getting bored.”           

2.  This company is on the fast track. Do you think that you can keep up?

Suggested Responses:

“I have stayed on top of the latest development in our industry and am computer literate." (Use this opportunity to showcase any training classes or courses you have taken.)

Also, consider hitting this question head-on by stating politely that you have not noticed any slowdown in attitude or energy. 

3.  This isn’t exactly the type of job you have done in the past. Can you tell us how you will transfer your skills?

Suggested Responses:

"I have viewed your website and read everything about your company.” (Then, draw some analogy to a previous area of expertise, and relate it to the new company's product or service).

4.  I noticed that you have been out of work for over six months. Can you explain this break in employment?

Suggested Responses:

"I explored some other options but they weren’t for me.  I feel that I have many more years of productivity left to work in this industry."

“I am looking for something different. I am fortunate to be in a position to take time to make sure this job is right for both of us. "

"I used this time to brush up (or learn) a new skill, and now I am ready to contribute my knowledge and expertise to an exciting company like yours."

5Why do you think you are qualified for this job? I don't see where you have experience that would match our business needs

Suggested Responses:

"My excitement at learning new things never diminishes. With my work experience, I know I will be a quick learner." Take this opportunity to point out any skills you have added to your repertoire. Identify a skill you have, and align it to something you would need to do on the new job.

6.  Your resume indicates you have worked at a lot of different places. Can you comment on that?

Suggested Responses:

“Each of those positions broadened my knowledge and skill base."

“It does appear that way, but, in the last 10 years, the economy has been such that mergers have forced a number of us to realize our potential in various environments." (Always turn a perceived negative into a real positive!)

7.   You were with your last company for 19 years. Can you change the way you did things?

Suggested Responses:

"I am looking for change!"

"My last company underwent many changes during that time, and I enjoyed trying new things and ideas." (Give examples whenever possible.)

8.  I see you have been a consultant. Does that just mean you were out of work?

Suggested Responses:

" My old company brought me back on contract to complete several projects, which I did — and now I want to see if there is something more exciting out there. "

“ I understand lots of people are calling themselves consultants while they look for a new position. " (Laugh — sometimes, it's OK to insert a little bit of levity.)

9.  What salary are you looking for (the implication that is may be too high because you have been in the workforce so long)

Suggested Responses:

Never respond with a specific dollar amount. Affirm that you have vast skills and experience. Indicate that you are either willing to start over to show them what you bring to the table or deserving of top dollar.

Alternatively, ask the interviewer what dollar amount is allocated for the position in this year's budget. And, finally ask the interviewer whether or not they are offering you the job since you are discussing salary requirements!

While I can’t guarantee that you will be asked any or all of these questions at your next job interview, they are food for thought!

Until next time...

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Issues Surrounding the Use of Social Media in the Life Sciences Industry are Still Alive and Well

Despite rumors of impending demise and premature death, the issues surrounding the use of social media in the life sciences industry are still alive and relevant. To that end, the Business Development Institute is sponsoring a “Healthcare Social Communications Leadership Forum Breakfasts on February 4, 2010 at New York University in Manhattan. The conference is limited to 75 attendees. While there are seats still available they are rapidly disappearing. 

Some of the topics to be discussed include:

  • How to connect with consumers who are already using the internet for healthcare information?
  • What are the case studies of leading brands that use internet based social strategies to achieve communications objectives?
  • What are examples of social communities that demonstrate how leading healthcare brands interact, educate and provide value to consumers online?
  • How to deal with regulatory and legal issues when planning and implementing social and internet based strategies
  • Why real-time social media tools, such as Twitter, are gaining momentum and what's the business case to use them
  • How to sell projects and prove ROI to senior management
  • What are the tools, technologies, and best practices for monitoring and measuring internet based programs?

Scheduled presenters and panelists are:

  1. Michael Fleming, Senior Director, Social Media, GlaxoSmithKline
  2. Robert Halper, Director of Video Communication, Johnson & Johnson
  3. Lance Hill, CEO, Within3
  4. Ray Kerins, Vice President / Worldwide Communications, Pfizer Inc.
  5. Marc Monseau, Director, Corporate Communications & Social Media, Johnson & Johnson
  6. Rodney Spady, Head of Global Interactive Marketing and Web Officer, OTC Global Marketing, Novartis Consumer Health, Inc.

For more information, including registration, please click here to visit the event website. Use promo code BIOC before February 3rd for a discounted rate of $175.

See you at the meeting!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Social Networking!!!!!!

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Does Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertising Really Work?--You Betcha!

Last week, the market-analyst firm Manhattan Research released a list of the top branded pharma Web sites based on traffic generated from direct-to-consumer (DTC) television ads. The firm tracked about 250 different product sites and asked 6,575 consumers which websites they visited in the past 12 months. Consumers were asked to recall the reason they visited the site, whether they are taking the product, think they need the product, and the actions they took after they visited the site. The following list represents the top ten product websites that were more likely to have website traffic driven by DTC television ads. However, it is important to note that the rankings are not based on the volume of traffic but the percentage of traffic generated in response to integrated DTC advertising campaigns.  

  1. NuvaRing—Merck (formerly Schering Plough formerly Organon)
  2. Latisse—Allergan
  3. Cialis—Lilly
  4. Boniva—Roche
  5. Abilify—Bristol Myers Squibb
  6. Gardasil—Merck
  7. Yaz— Bayer
  8. Viagra—Pfizer
  9. Levitra—Eli Lilly
  10. Lunesta—Sepracor

Interestingly, of the top ten products on the list about 70% of them have to do with sex or woen's reproductive health. The exceptions include Abilify (depression and bipolar disease), Lunesta (insomnia) and Latisse (eyelash growth). Pfizer, Levitra and Cialis are treatments for ED, Gardasil is an anti-cervical cancer vaccine, Boniva is used to treat osteoporosis (post menopausal women) whereas Yaz and NuvaRing are both used for birth control.

I thought the results of the survey where interesting because many experts say the effectiveness of DTC television advertising may be waning with the growing use of online resources. While the results of this survey are not conclusive, it suggests that DTC television advertising won’t be going away anytime soon. And that the growing use of televisions as web portals may actually increase not diminish industry’s reliance on DTC television ads to sell its product and treatments—oy! 

Hat tip to George Koroneos at the PharmaExec.com blog.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Watching!!!!!!!!!

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Update: Tracking Pfizer's Job Cuts and Other Layoffs

It is getting difficult to keep track of the job cuts that are happening almost daily at Pfizer. A quick perusal of the job cuts to date indicate that the company has eliminated about 1200 jobs in the past week; 680 in Pennsylvania, 400 in New Jersey and 116 in Rockland County, NY (where I grew up!). While there is currently a lull in activity, I suspect additional job cuts will be forthcoming in the near future.

Merck earlier announced that it was slashing about 500 jobs in New Jersey which continues the ongoing carnage that the NJ pharmaceutical workforce had to endure over the past three years.

Meanwhile, in New England, Charles River Laboratories International announced that it is suspending operations at its Shrewsbury, MA facility by the middle of this year. Approximately 300 workers will be losing their jobs at the facility that focused on preclinical drug development.

Despite claims that the US economy is improving, life sciences layoffs are continuing and job growth is much slower than expected. While some economists aren’t that surprised, I would be nervous and exploring my options if I was employed at a life sciences company!

Until next time...

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

A Twitter List for Pharma Companies

Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog and “all around good guy,” has created a Twitter list that follows the tweets of all of the pharmaceutical companies that use Twitter. Because the list of companies that are currently using Twitter is so small, it is a convenient aggregation tool to monitor the musings and tweets of companies that participate! 

 Hat tip and shout out to Mark!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Happy Holidays!!!!

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Social Media, Regulatory Guidance and Patient Advocacy

Jonathan Richman, author of the Dose of Digital Blog, got it exactly right in today’s post  entitled “Patients WILL Have the Final Say on Pharma Social Media” He was spot on with his conclusion that while social media pundits and patient advocacy groups can push FDA to attempt to provide guidance on the use of social media, in the end, it will be patients (customers) not regulators who determine whether or not pharma will incorporate social media into future business models. Recently, it has been pointed out (on Twitter of course) that patient advocacy groups were under represented at the recent public FDA hearings on social media. While this is true, it likely will have little bearing on the regulatory guidance ultimately issued by the agency. This is because public input is generally not used to fundamentally shape regulatory guidance or policies but to fine tune them! The agency generally has a regulatory framework in mind before it conducts public hearing to collect stakeholder input and comments.

As I mentioned in previous posts, FDA intentionally crafts regulations and guidelines that are subject to interpretation because they are meant to serve as the minimum regulatory requirements and standards that must be met to insure drug and device safety and efficacy. While this is not ideal for many corporate regulatory affairs professionals, it is necessary because the agency simply cannot provide specific or custom-designed guidance to the plethora of drug and device manufactures that it oversees.  In other words, the regulations that FDA crafts are meant to serve as general regulatory frameworks not clearly defined, company-specific rules and regulations. Companies that struggle with interpretation of FDA regulations are encouraged to meet with FDA regulators for guidance and clarification. More importantly, while FDA is charged with insuring the safety and efficacy of drugs and devices, the agency has very little control over how companies choose to interact with patients, customers and stakeholders. For example, companies ARE NOT required to submit direct-to-consumer (DTC) ads, marketing and advertising campaigns or other promotional materials for FDA review. This means that drug and device manufacturers have enormous flexibility in choosing how to market, advertise and promote approved products. FDA regulators only get involved when the agency is alerted to the possibility that certain ads or promotional materials may contain inappropriate, misleading or inaccurate medical information or claims. When a company is “snagged” by FDA for suspect marketing practices, the agency generally imposes mandatory regulatory review (for a defined period of time) of all subsequent DTC and promotional campaigns developed by the transgressor. To that end, the lack of patient advocacy testimony at the recent FDA hearings on social media should have little or no impact on the guidance that FDA ultimately issues.

While the much anticipated guidance ought to provide a regulatory framework for companies that choose to use social media, it can not “force” drug and device manufacturers to adopt or use it. This will be a corporate decision that will likely be made by legal, regulatory and marketing pharmaceutical executives. Finally, as Jonathan rightly points out, the needs and demands of patients will ultimately determine whether or not a drug or device manufacturer implements a social media strategy. And, not surprisingly, this decision will likely be based on drug sales and business outcomes rather than a need for patient education or public safety. Because—at the end of the day—business is business!

Hat tip to Jonathan!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!!!!!!

 

Pharma and YouTube: An Update

Earlier this week, Mark Senak who writes the EyeonFDA blog, offered his insights and analysis of pharma’s relationship with Twitter. Today, he tackled YouTube and Pharma. While YouTube has been around a lot longer than Twitter, pharma’s use (with the exception of Johnson and Johnson, Sanofi-Aventis and Tibotec) of the popular video-sharing site has been extremely limited despite the ability of the entity that posts the video to eliminate or regulate the ability of users to leave and share comments after viewing it. 

I suspect that the industry’s reluctance to use YouTube may be related to the lack of regulatory guidance for this medium. Nevertheless, I don’t completely understand why drug makers have chosen not to use the widely popular video site to increase patient awareness about certain medical conditions or to promote patient wellness. These types of videos would likely be appreciated by the public and quite possibly help to repair tarnished image of the pharmaceutical industry held by many consumers and stakeholders.

Hat tip to Mark!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!!!

 

Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) Advertising:Historical Timeline and Impact

I was chatting with a fellow medical writing colleague the other day and the topic of direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising came up. I suggested that DTC advertising is largely ineffectual but my colleague suggested otherwise. To prove his point, he sent me a fascinating article entitled “Direct-to-Consumer Advertising: An Attitude Survey of Psychiatric Physicians (Bhanji et al. Primary Psychiatry. 2008; 15(11):67-71). The conclusion of the paper was somewhat surprising (to me anyway):

......pilot survey of psychiatrists revealed that DTC advertising has the potential to improve awareness of medical conditions and decrease the stigma of mental illness. Surveyed psychiatrists believed that DTC had little significant effect on their personal prescribing practices. However, >80% of respondents reported they had prescribed medications specifically requested by their patients. Most respondents failed to endorse that DTC had a positive effect on the doctor-patient relationship, or on improved patients’ medication compliance.

This suggests that people (at least those suffering from mental illness) listen to and likely learn about their illnesses from DTC ads. Further, it explains why drug makers continue to spend large sums of money on DTC advertising despite diminishing ROI on traditional print and television advertising revenues —it works!  While the effectiveness of DTC advertising was interesting, the real eye opener was the authors’ historical account of the evolution of DTC advertising in the US. 

Although currently a hot topic, DTC advertising in the US has been around for nearly 300 years. In 1708, Nicholas Boone placed the first advertisement for a patent medication

in a Boston newspaper. For the next 230 years, advertisements for patented medications claiming to treat everything from dandruff to infidelity could be found in magazines, newspapers, and traveling medicine shows. In 1938, Congress passed the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which gave the FDA authority over the labeling of pharmaceuticals and the Federal Trade Commission control over their advertising.

No new legislation was introduced until 1962 when the Kefauver-Harris amendments proposed the concept of consumer protectionism when dealing with pharmaceuticals.

Under these amendments, authority for drug promotional advertising review was reassigned to the FDA. The FDA established requirements similar to those in existence today, i.e., specifications of contraindications, effectiveness, side effect profiles, and a cost-benefit discussion. Virtually all of the advertisements were targeted to physicians.

In 1981, the pharmaceutical industry proposed shifting marketing to include the consumer. At issue was the requirement to include extensive clinical information on the product, making it problematic to use television media to reach potential customers. That same year the Commissioner of the FDA, Arthur Hayes, requested the pharmaceutical industry put a voluntary moratorium on DTC advertising to allow the FDA to study their request to reduce the required disclaimers.

In 1985, the FDA concluded that the existing regulations to safeguard the public interest were adequate. This ruling had the effect of postponing the growth of DTC for the next 12 years. However, 1997 marked the beginning of rapid growth in DTC advertising. This change in marketing was attributed to the new FDA guidelines on broadcast DTC marketing. For the first time, drug manufacturers could present the name of the product and the condition it was intended to treat, and not report all of the contraindications.

The financial implications of this change in policy were enormous. In 1985, $17 million was spent on DTC marketing. By 2000, that figure rose to $2.5 billion, and $4.2 billion in 2005. In 2008, the estimated DTC marketing budget will be in the sum of $8 billion. Real spending on DTC advertising increased by 330% from 1996–2005.

As of 2007, only the US and New Zealand permit DTC advertising of prescription medications. In countries outside the US, the pharmaceutical industry has applied pressure to relax regulations regarding DTC marketing with little success. Despite DTC advertising being banned in most non-US countries, there is growing international concern that drug companies are circumventing legislation through the use of internet advertising and “spam” E-mail. Pharmaceutical companies also provide “awareness campaigns” or infomercials with vague references to prescription treatments in order to improve their sales abroad.

As previously mentioned on BioJobBlog, DTC advertising is big business. And, eliminating DTC advertising would likely help to reduce the cost associated with new drug development. This is because most drug makers don’t tell you that marketing and advertising costs are factored into the $1.0 billion that is generally believed to be the price associated with bringing a new drug to market. Who knew?

Until next time...

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

 

Who's Who in the Pharma Twitterverse

Mark Senak who writes the EyeonFDA blog has compiled a list of the life sciences companies that presently have a Twitter account and use it. While there are only 12 companies on the list, he provides a nice commentary on their use and makes some recommendations for improvement.

Although I am a staunch supporter of the use of social media in the life sciences, it appears to me that the discussion about its use has been somewhat muted since the FDA convened a public hearing on the topic last month. I suspect that many of the companies and stakeholders who participated in the discussion prior to the FDA meeting are presently in “wait and see” mode. However, don’t be surprised if the social media guidance issued by FDA is lacking and excruciatingly wanting!!!! For those of you who may not be familiar with the ways in which the agency operates, its regulators tend to craft guidance and regulation that are broad, loosely defined and open to interpretation. The agency intentionally crafts its guidance and regulations this way because it doesn’t want its rules and regulations to be “literally interpreted” by companies and other stakeholders. Generally speaking, its regulations represent the “minimum” requirements that must be met in order to insure regulatory compliance. In other words, there is no upper limit on what companies can do to insure compliance but there certainly is a minimum requirement that must be met to avoid regulatory sanctions and penalties. As one lawyer who used to work for the agency shared with me recently, “FDA crafts the regulations but it is left to the companies and courts to interpret them.”

Most of the current discussions about social media and the life sciences industry primarily focus on its use as marketing and promotional vehicle. And, as many of you may already know, FDA isn’t exactly keen or pleased with the current marketing and advertising strategies and practices utilized by a sizeable number of life sciences companies. Perhaps a shift away from marketing and advertising discussions to more regulatory-friendly and practical applications like clinical trials recruitment and public outreach may lead to a more rapid uptake of social media by FDA and life sciences companies? Just sayin’

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!!

 

Viagra: "The Next Generation"

Pfizer was the first to bring us ED (erectile dysfunction) and now two companies—one large (Johnson and Johnson) and one small (Sciele Pharma)—are daring to boldly go where no MAN has gone before: to conquer PE aka premature ejaculation!

According to a brilliantly-crafted story by Natasha Singer published in this Sunday’s New York Times business section, JnJ developed a pill called Priligy which is intended for men who ejaculate before intercourse or within a few seconds after beginning. Priligy which is intended to help to prolong latency before orgasm is approved and sold in nine countries but hasn’t been approved for sale in the US. On the other hand (so to speak), little known, Atlanta, GA-based Sciele Pharma is planning to seek regulatory approval for a prescription aerosol-based product that is sprayed on the skin (in this case the penis) to prolong latency and forestall ejaculation. While the true incidence of PE is uncertain, the manufacturers of these medications want men (and women) to believe that the condition is more pervasive and prevalent than reported. 

Interestingly, the worldwide sales of Pfizer’s Viagra were approximately $1.93 billion last year. As previously noted on BioJobBlog, Viagra celebrated its 10th anniversary of marketing approval last March. If you do the math, almost $20 billion dollars worth of Viagra prescriptions were written over the past decade. This suggests that many millions of men must suffer from ED worldwide. However, for those of you who may not know, Viagra also works quite well for healthy, sexually active males who don’t suffer from ED. It is generally acknowledged that it is this segment of the male population that is responsible for the annual blockbuster sales of Viagra and related medications. Also, it is important to note that prior to the introduction of Viagra, ED wasn’t a recognized clinical indication (it was known as impotence) and there were very effective treatments for it. And while ED is a legitimate quality-of-life issue, it occurs in only a small percentage of sexually active males; mostly in older men with hypertension, cardiovascular conditions or those who have had their prostates removed.

Viagra, like Botox, Latisse and others, is classified as a so-called “lifestyle” drugs. Generally speaking, lifestyle drugs are developed to improve the quality of life of patients not treat potentially life threatening diseases or conditions. In her article, Ms. Singer takes the pharmaceutical industry to task about the development of  blockbuster lifestyle drugs.

“But creating a blockbuster quality-of-life drug like Viagra involves more than just being innovative or being first. Sometimes it requires a drug maker to create and market a whole new category of disease.

The template goes something like this: Start with a legitimate quality-of-life issue — like fitful sleep or shyness — that does not yet have its own prescription medication and is debilitating to a few people a lot of the time. Next, position the quality-of-life issue as a medical condition with symptoms so common it covers vast numbers of people who had previously not identified themselves as having a health problem, or who thought they were just experiencing an occasional and normal annoyance.

Articles in medical journals with high estimates on the prevalence of the issue help convince doctors and journalists of its scope. F.D.A. approval of the new drug legitimizes the condition as a problem with a medical solution.

While there is no doubt that some men are distressed about their inability to control their orgasms, there is little concrete evidence to suggest that there is an epidemic of premature ejaculation”

Although I have never used Viagra, I have a few “older male friends” who swear by it! And, while I have no doubt that Viagra and the new medications being developed to treat PE may benefit a few men, is it appropriate to elevate premature ejaculation to a bona fide clinical indication and spend billions to develop and market treatments for it? Don’t get me wrong; I am not trying to minimize the emotional distress and discomfort associated with PE. But, the last time I checked, PE didn’t make the top ten lists of the world’s most devastating and debilitating clinical indications or unmet medical needs!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Calling All R&D Scientists: AstraZeneca Appears To Be Hiring!

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.

 

AstraZeneca


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!!!!!

Pfizer Survey: Physicians Favor Using an Electronic Health Records System to Report Adverse Events

I realize that I have been blogging about adverse events for the past couple of day but, let’s face it; the pharmaceutical industry lives or dies by the number of adverse events (AEs) that are reported for approved and marketed drugs. In any event, I came upon an interesting post in a Pharmaceutical Processing e-blast about the results of a survey  (conducted by Pfizer) which revealed that physicians are more likely to report side effects and adverse events through an electronic health records (EHR) system as compared with traditional paper methods. Nearly 60 percent of the 300 physicians who responded to the survey also agreed that AE reporting through an EHR would improve patient care.

While the results of the survey are not surprising (to me anyway), they suggest that the use of electronic methods for adverse events reporting may be a boon to drug manufacturers that are required (by FDA and other regulatory agencies) to collect information regarding the safety and tolerability of approved and marketed drugs.

In a previous post, I opined that social media would be an ideal platform for AE reporting. The results of the Pfizer survey tend to support this supposition. While EHR aren’t exactly social media, they are electronic and, it appears to me (based on Pfizer survey results), that healthcare providers and consumers may be more likely to report potential AEs using electronic as compared with conventional methods. Put simply, electronic reporting is much simpler, quicker and more facile than the current pen and paper model for AE reporting. And, in today’s rapidly paced and hectic world, time savings can translate into cost savings and improved efficiencies.

Paradoxically, the Pfizer survey results tend to contradict the notion that social media would be a bane to AE reporting for most drug makers. As I mentioned yesterday, many drug makers who have almost universally shunned social media, contend that the use of social media would overburden their AE reporting systems and possibly put them at enormous legal and regulatory risk. However, as I pointed out many times in the past, AEs are an expected reality in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices industries. And, while drug makers are deathly afraid of AEs and reluctant to learn of them, the more information this is available about potential safety and tolerability issues, the better off most drug manufacturers may be. For example, if Merck was alerted earlier about the cardiovascular problems that Vioxx patients were experiencing, then possibly fewer patients may have been affected and harmed and perhaps, an improved version of Vioxx, an effective pain medication, might still be availability to patients who benefit from it.

To that end, providing physicians, healthcare workers and consumers with an accessible e-based AE reporting system built around social media would allow drug makers to quickly determine whether or not one of their drugs exhibits tolerability or safety issues that might warrant further investigation.  And, I believe that putting the appropriate social media AE reporting systems in place would allow drug and device manufacturers to monitor the performance of their products in real time and more accurately monitor, collect and analyze safety and tolerability data for certain drugs. This, in turn, would likely lead to the development of improved safer and more effective medications and devices, lower drug development and manufacturing costs and ultimately reduce drug makers’ exposure to legal and regulatory actions.

Until next time...

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

 

Social Media Redux: "Adverse Events Reporting is a Red Herring?"

In a previous blog post, I raised the possibility that the life sciences industry may be using adverse event (AE) reporting to explain why it has been slow to adopt social media as a means of communicating and interacting with its customers and stakeholders. The industry argument against social media goes something like this: by engaging physicians, consumers and other stakeholders in social media conversations, there will be a massive and unmanageable explosion of AEs posted to social networking sites, company websites and health and science blogs. Because of this, companies will be obliged to report them to FDA. Company executives’ fear that this will be inordinately expensive, egregiously time-consuming, technologically-daunting and most importantly, expose companies to possible legal and regulatory actions. While some of these claims may have some validity, they are not as expensive, technologically-challenging or insurmountable as anti-social media advocate would have you believe. For example, while conducting an interview for Life Science Leader magazine for an article on social media and pharma, several pharma employees exploring the social media space confided that most companies already have assiduously-crafted AE reporting policies in place to easily manage and accommodate AE reporting from  websites, cell phones and even text messages! For those of you who may be wondering, before potential AEs are required to be reported to FDA it must meet the following criteria: (i) there is an identifiable patient; (ii) there is an identifiable reporter or observer; (iii) there is a specific drug or biologic involved in the event; and (iv) there is an adverse event or fatal outcome.

Jonathan Richman (social media guru and pharmaceutical marketing expert) and I have previously weighed in on the so-called “adverse event reporting myth” that has been circulating in life sciences social media circles. In fact, I posited in my previous post that adverse event reporting may actually be something of a “red herring” being used by the industry. For those of you who may not be familiar with the term, it means focusing on an obvious and easily identifiable issue or object to draw attention away from a more important central issue.  To that end, I was pleased to read a post today on Jonathan’s Dose of Digital Blog entitled 166 Reportable Adverse Events Equals One Red Herring.

In today’s post, Jonathan does some basic mathematical calculations and arrives at the conclusion (based on the occurrence and frequency of Internet-based adverse events disclosed in a recent Nielsen survey) that the likely number of adverse events posted on social media sites per day would be around 166 (for the entire industry). Doing some of my own high-level mathematical calculations; this translates into a likely total annual number of about 60,590 AEs. And, as Jonathan rightly points out, if this number is divided by the number of life sciences companies with approved drugs and devices on the market, you quickly realize that shouldn’t be that onerous, labor intensive or expensive for companies to manage AE reporting resulting from social media sources. It would be interesting and informative to compare this annual rate with the actual number of reportable annual adverse events being handled by life sciences companies today. 

Like Jonathan, I believe that the “adverse event reporting issue” is a classic example of a “red herring” being employed by the life sciences industry to explain its reluctance to jump on the social media bandwagon. Personally, what I believe is really at stake, is the systemic changes that would be required to transform a historically, opaque and unresponsive industry into a transparent, accountable and responsive one that would be required if it embraces social media as an integral part of its business model.  

Addendum:  Shortly after posting this article, a new post appeared on the Dose of Digital blog that provided an indepth analysis of the Nielsen survey and its implications.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Signs of an Economic Recovery? Spending on Direct-to-Consumer Advertising is on the Rise Again

A post on the Pharmalot blog today reports that spending on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising came bounding back in the third quarter —rising 15 percent to $1.16 billion, according to DTC Perspectives (which cited data from TNS Media Intelligence).

The increased spending marks the first quarterly gain in nearly two years after slumping 6.4 percent earlier this year from January to June. According to the Pharmalot post, “Internet spending increased the most—more than tripling between January and September to $221 million (display ads only). And, more ads were placed in newspapers, which showed a 25 percent gain to $104 million during the same period.

During the first nine months of 2009 the leading advertisers by brand (each of which spent more than $125 million each) were:

  1. Lipitor (Pfizer)
  2. Abilify (Bristol-Myers Squibb/Otsuka America)
  3. Cymbalta (Eli Lilly) and
  4. Advair (GlaxoSmithKline)

Could this be a sign that the pharmaceutical industry thinks that the economy is improving? Alternatively, maybe pharma marketers think that people might become increasingly stressed by the economy and drugs like Abilify and Cymbalta (a variety of psychiatric indications) and Lipitor (high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease ands stroke) may be in greater demand. And finally, from a completely cynical perspective, maybe drug makers want to sell as many drugs as possible before healthcare reform and possible price controls kick in?

Hat tip to Ed!!!!

Until next time...

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

 

Jobseekers: Treat Your Search like a Full Time Job

Losing a job or getting laid off is without a doubt one of the more emotionally devastating events that most people face. Unfortunately, in these troubling financial times, many more people are likely to face this likelihood than any other time in recent history.

However, if you lose or have lost a job, it is important to keep your situation in perspective and realize that it isn’t the end of the world and that there are things that you can do to find a new job! Having said that, like most other things in life you will have to work hard to achieve that goal! This will require organization, commitment and dedication to the job search. And, the best way to conduct a successful job search is to approach it and treat it like a full time job! To that end, attempt to divide each day into manageable list of tasks and allocate sufficient time to accomplish them—just like you would at a full time job. Also, since time is usually no longer an issue, you can spend some of your time researching new opportunities, networking with others or finding new contacts who might be able to help you get your foot in the door at a prospective employer’s company or organization.

Sitting in front of a computer all day, applying for online jobs on company websites and job boards isn’t going to cut it—mostly because you won’t hear back from most of the places where you submitted online job application. In fact, I think that the online approach to job hunting almost guarantees that you will become dejected, depressed and hopeless. 

In my opinion, the best approach to a job search (after losing a job) is to recognize that anything less than full time commitment to finding a new one likely won’t be successful. Based on my own and other’s experience, a successful job search consists of a mixture of focused and disciplined online and IRL activities. Developing and implementing an ordered and strategic job search provides jobseekers with organization and a “structure” that will likely help to ward off feelings of confusion, dejection and hopelessness experienced by most people who have lost jobs. For more ideas and suggestions on how to transform your job search into a full time job please check out this excellent article by Phyllis Korkki.

Until next time....

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

 

FDA, Fair Balance and Social Media

Mark Senak, social media advocate and author of the EyeonFDA blog, has been spot on with his commentary on the recent public hearings held by FDA to unravel the social media conundrum facing the life sciences industry. Despite its good intentions, the agency is intent on applying an anachronistic method of developing guidance (designed for processes that undergo incremental changes) for a technology that changes rapidly and is ill-defined. In other words, they are trying to force a square peg into a round hole—it simply won't work!

As duly noted by Mark, FDA seems focused on inconsequential and banal issues like fair balance. The whole concept of fair balance has never been clearly defined and companies continually do everything possible to test the agency's resolve on the issue by finding new ways to push the envelope.Therefore, it makes no sense to me that the agency would choose to focus on the question of fair balance and social media when more pressing issues like adverse event reporting, responsibility for site content(when tools like Google Sidewiki are available to Internet users ) and off-label promotion of approved drugs and devices. As Mark rightly points out, is anybody really going to read the fine print about side effects and adverse events associated with a drug when they click through on an ad that promotes a medicine that might help them? Do people really read the product insert forms that accompany all prescription drugs?

Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to play down the importance of fair balance but DTC advertising is old hat and most experts agree that it really doesn't work well to sell prescription drugs. To that end, I think FDA needs to throw out the old play book and create a new one for social media. Unlike previous regulations, the ones that will guide social media need to be flexible and adaptive enough to accommodate the rapidly changing social media landscape. Nobody said it was going to be easy but that is why FDA employees get paid the big bucks!

Until next time....

Good luck and Happy Thanksgiving!!!!!!!!

 

 

Pfizer/Wyeth Layoff Update

After announcing yesterday that it will be reorganizing and closing 6 of 20 R&D sites worldwide, Pfizer/Wyeth announced today that as many as 2000 R&D scientists will lose their jobs. I suspect that others will lose their jobs in the next few months or so.

The Pfizer/Wyeth and Merck Schering Plough mergers signal the beginning of the end of the traditional vertically integrated pharmaceutical business model. It is evident that pharma is shifting away from its almost 100 year focus on R&D and manufacturing to less labor intensive and costly activities like advertising, marketing, sales and distribution—things that drug makers have excelled in the past decade or so. Innovation will likely no longer come from within but from external sources including academia, biotechnology companies and third party vendors including CROs and CMOs.   

While the loss of thousands of R&D scientists will have little impact on the productivity and operations of life sciences companies themselves, it has serious implications for academic institutions that train life sciences graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. In the past, PhD scientists who were unable to find academic jobs too refuge and found gainful employment in the life sciences industry. However, American industrial R&D jobs are becoming harder and harder to find as larger companies continue to outsource those activities, to Asia, South America and Eastern Europe. And, the competition for the remaining jobs is becoming increasingly fierce. Put simply, academic institutions have to begin to realize that we no longer need as many PhD-trained life scientists as we have in the past. At present, there is a glut of PhD life scientists in the US, many of whom can’t find jobs. Perhaps, this should be taken into account before graduate school admissions committees determine the number of new graduate students they will admit next year.

Until next time...

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

 

Social Media and the Pharmaceutical Industry: A Historical Perspective and Commentary

In today’s edition of the incisive EyeonFDA blog, Mark Senak, provides a historical perspective on events leading to the US Food and Drug Administration public hearing on the use of social media and medical promotion that will be held on Thursday and Friday, November 12 and 13, 2009. As Mark points out, registration for the meeting was closed because of an overwhelming response and the number of people who wanted to offer testimony on the topic. Many social media enthusiasts view the public hearing as something of a “game changer” that may influence the future direction of social media in the life sciences industry. But, as Mark, astutely points out, only four pharmaceutical companies and one or two trade organizations will be participating at the hearing. 

The lack of industry participation at the meeting is curious given that 14 companies received warning letters several months ago about their misuse of ad associated with the results obtain by Google search. Further, pharmaceutical companies have consistently and publicly stated that their aversion to social media is contingent upon the lack of FDA’s regulatory guidance for its use. By not actively participating in the public hearings later this week, many pharma companies have chosen to remain silent and will likely allow FDA to craft social media policies that guide the promotional activities of drug makers on its own. This begs the question: why would drug makers allow a federal regulatory agency to unilaterally dictate policy, when the policy will likely affect their bottom lines, i.e. sales and profits? The industry’s refusal to actively participate in these hearings is another example of the cat and mouse game that drug makers like to play with FDA. Put simply, drug makers expect and want FDA to commit (in writing) to certain policies and guidelines and once established, company regulators and lawyers are instructed to find loopholes and work-arounds. I liken the drug industry’s refusal to actively participate in the upcoming public hearings to the now infamous rope-ad-dope strategy Mohammed Ali used to knock out George Foreman in the now infamous Rumble in the Jungle in 1974. This is how wikipedia defines the rope-a-dope: “The rope-a-dope is performed by a boxer assuming a protected stance, in Ali's classic pose, lying against the ropes, and allowing his opponent to hit him, in the hope that the opponent will become tired and make mistakes which the boxer can exploit in a counterattack.” I hope that I am wrong about the drug industry’s strategy and motives.

Without active industry participation it isn’t clear how effective the FDA public hearing on social media will be. As Mark adroitly points out in today’s post, “The bulk of the other presentations are tertiary stakeholders perhaps sensing a vehicle for free self-promotion such as advertising and public relations firms and bloggers, but they aren't the real stakeholders in this issue.  The real stakeholders are those who are referred to in the meeting notice - the medical products industry.” I would also add the American public to the stakeholder list who also has considerable “skin in the game.”

Pharma’s active participation at many of the social media conferences that I recently attended indicates that something must be in it for pharma; otherwise they wouldn’t attend. There is no question that social media isn’t a passing fad and is now an integral part of the Web 2.0 experience. That said, for the first time in many years, drug makers have a unique opportunity to actively voice their ideas and concerns and collaboratively work with FDA to craft meaningful social media regulatory guidance. As many of us “outside observers” know, the agency doesn’t have all the answers and we would like to think that drug makers would extend a helping hand to avoid confusion and misunderstandings about the use of social media to promote their products and services. While only 4 companies are scheduled to speak at the hearings, I suspect that there will be many life science company representatives in attendance. Nevertheless, despite what may happen at this week’s hearings, I hope that, going forward, drug makers and device manufacturers will begin to view FDA as a partner rather than an adversary!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Pfizer/Wyeth Announces Plans to Consolidate and Reduce R&D Activities at Collegeville, PA and Pearl River, NY Sites

Employees of Pfizer/Wyeth were notified earlier today of impending changes and consolidation that will be taking place at the newly combined company. According to internal sources, Cambridge, MA, Groton, CT and Pearl River, NY will be the main centers of the combined company’s East Coast operations and San Francisco and La Jolla/San Diego CA will represent West Coast operations. In Europe, the research facility in Sandwich, England will be the main R&D center with a network of smaller sites, in locations such as Montreal, Ottawa, Cambridge UK, Aberdeen UK, and Dusseldorf, Germany providing expertise in vaccine production and biomanufacturing. The company’s China R&D Center in Shanghai will remain the focal point of operations in Asia,

There will be substantial reductions in headcount and the company’s R&D footprint. These include:

  • The former Pfizer headquarters in New London, CT, which will be consolidated into the nearby Groton, CT site. Functions currently located at New London will be relocated to Groton
  • Elimination of all R&D activities at Princeton, NJ; Sanford and the Research Triangle Park, NC; Chazy, NY; Rouses Point and Plattsburgh, NY; Gosport, Slough and Taplow, UK
  • R&D activity will be substantially reduced at the Collegeville, PA and Pearl River, NY sites. Pearl River will remain a center for vaccine and biopharmaceutical development

I suspect that many of the employees who will lose their jobs as a result of the consolidation have already been or will be notified shortly of their fates. It is unfortunate that pharmaceutical companies continue to lay off thousands of employees when the US unemployment rate continues to rise and will likely hit 12 to 13 percent before it is all said and done. As expected, the combined company is reducing its US R&D operations and will likely outsource or purchase these activities from external sources. It is not a good time to be an American R&D scientist.

Until next time...

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

 

Merck Giveth and Johnson and Johnson Taketh Away

I am attending the Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students (ABRCMS) in sunny Phoenix, AZ where I will be providing career development guidance to undergraduate and graduate students. Ironically, given the dismal job prospects in the life sciences industry for entry level employees, I will be giving a talk on how to find a job!  Last year's meeting in Orlando was a great one and I expect this one to be just as good.

While I am on the road, it doesn't mean that I won't be keeping track of the goings on back in my neck of the woods. To that end, Merck announced today that it will keep Schering Plough's corporate headquaters in Kenilworth, NJ open. Merck announced the decision today after closing on the $7 billion deal yesterday. This is good news for the NJ residents who currently work at the Kenilworth site. New Jersey has been extremely hard hit by all of the pharmaceutical layoffs in the past few years. Unemployment continues to rise and things will not get any better since conservative Republican Chris Christie was elected governor on Tuesday (he plans on laying off massive numbers of state employees) once he takes office in 2010.

Johnson and Johnson, on the other hand, announced that it was closing research & development facilities in Radnor and Chesterbrook, PA and consolidating those operations at the company's Spring House site. The New Brunswick, N.J., company would not say how many jobs are at those locations now or how many would remain in Spring House after the move, which is to be completed by 2012. These closure come shortly after JnJ announced earlier this week that is was elimating ca 8,200 employees or roughly seven percent of its global workforce.

Let's hope that things begin to improve soon. 

Hat tip to the Pharmalot blog!

Until next time....

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

 

 

 

Did You Know That Pharma Has An Image Problem and FDA Raised Its Regulatory Filing Fees?

It is amazing the things you learn if you pay attention from time to time.  While attending a meeting on e-healthcare last week in Philadelphia I learned that according to the American public the pharmaceutical industry is less popular than the banking industry. This was startling to me given that the recent financial collapse was caused almost entirely by the banking industry.  That the pharmaceutical industry is more reviled than the banking industry suggests that life sciences company have a bit of PR work to do.  But, not to worry, people still hate the oil industry more than the pharmaceutical industry.

On another note, the US FDA decided to raise the cost of regulatory filings for fiscal year 2010.  The cost of filing an application with clinical data is $1.4 million (up from $ 1.2 million in FY 2009); $702, 750 for an application not requiring clinical data or a supplement requiring clinical data (up from $623,600 in 2009) and 457,200 as compared with $425,000 in FY 2009 for an establishment fee (for facilities where drugs are made).* 

I guess the agency figures that pharma can handle the increases despite poor public image and an ongoing recession.

* AAPS News Magazine, Oct-Nov '09

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

Conference Round Up: e-Patient Connections 2009

e-Patients Connections 2009 (#epatcon) was held this past Monday and Tuesday at the Park Hyatt hotel in Philadelphia, PA. BioCrowd was one of several co-sponsors of the event. The theme of the conference, organized by Kevin Kruse a veteran medical communication and training expert, who now runs Kru Research, was to “reach, engage and educate empowered digital health consumers.” And, boy, did it deliver! While this was Kru Research’s first official conference, it was well organized, extremely interactive and the quality of the speakers was second to none! Topics that were featured included social media and the life sciences industry, technological advances in e-based healthcare delivery, the relationship between the news media and healthcare information and the continuing evolution of online and e-based healthcare communities.

Conference attendees included representatives from the life sciences industry, medical communications experts, advertising and marketing professionals and a multitude of social media enthusiasts and consultants who kept the Twitter screen humming throughout the meeting (a big shout out to the “troublemaking table”). And, surprisingly, there was a representative from the Division of Drug Marketing and Advertising and Communications (DDMAC) at the US Food and Drug Administration, who I believe, was one of the most sought after individuals at the meeting. CNN reporter Elizabeth Cohen who writes the Empowered Patient and racecar driver Charles Kimball, a type I diabetic and company spokesperson for Novo Nordisk also gave talks.

My favorite talks were those presented by online patient community organizers including Tricia Geoghegan of Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals who created the Facebook ADHD Allies community, Lisa Tate of WomenHeart and Robert Schumm of Bayer Consumer Care who created Facebook Strong@ Heart and Rachel Lewinson of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Organization and Susan Harrow Rago of Novo Nordisk who created Juvenation.org a website dedicated to those with Type I diabetes. These communities are outstanding examples of how partnerships between pharmaceutical companies and advocacy groups can help to better educate the public and heighten awareness about potentially life-altering diseases. Another example of a great online community and healthcare portal is Insomnia 123.com. This website was conceived and constructed by Christine Macadams and her partners’ one of whom is a practicing physician. Unlike the other online communities, which are sponsored and mainly supported by consumer healthcare division of large pharmaceutical companies, Insomnia 123.com was exclusively created by a group of concerned individuals who wanted to better educate and improve the lives of people with insomnia—a largely unreported and self-medicated condition.

On the technical side, the talks presented by Lee Segal of Klick, Kevin Durr of Avantera , Ian Kelly of Red Nucleus and Scott Ballenger of ListenLogic were illuminating and extremely informative. Some of the innovations taking place in digital media are exciting and almost overwhelming at times (even for a social media enthusiast like me). I think the company to watch is ListenLogic which uses semantic search engines to collect real time data and “chatter” on the web. This technology may provide a cost-effective solution to assuage the concerns of many life sciences companies that claim that collecting and analyzing overwhelming amounts of data is one of the main reasons why they are reluctant to entry the social media space.

Marc Monseau of Johnson and Johnson gave an illuminating talk on his experiences as a corporate blogger and Twitter user and described some of the challenges that had to be overcome before his company was able to break the “social media barrier.” Janice McCallum, an economist by training and a healthcare communications and media expert gave an informative talk about the growing role and impact of patient-generated healthcare content on patient awareness and education.

Finally, the novel and innovative Pecha Kucha sessions were outstanding and extremely well done! While all were expertly crafted, Dr. Val’s and Jonathan Richman’s Pecha Kucha were memorable. Dr. Val’s, which was extremely powerful and moving, was performed entirely in verse and Jonathan’s was—well, one of Jonathan’s always entertaining and informative presentations.

In summary, the “e-Patient Connections 2009” was a resounding success and in my opinion reached its goal to “reach engage and educate empowered digital health consumers.” That said, I can’t wait for “e-Patient Connections 2010” meeting!!!

Hat tip to @ellenhoenig and @eileenobrien for inviting me to my first tweetup (great fun) and finally meeting @janice McCallum, @christianeTrue, @stevewoodruff and Silja aka @whydotpharma

Until next time...

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

 

The Changing Face of Pharmaceutical Sales: AstraZeneca Offers Its Entire Sales Force a Buyout Option

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!!!!!!

 

Science Magazine Survey: American Life Sciences Companies are Some of the Best to Work for in the World

An annual survey conducted by Science magazine and the American Association has identified the 2008 top twenty life sciences employers in the world. The rankings were based on a company’s leadership, stability, social responsibility and treatment of its employees. Six of the top 10— Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Genzyme Corp., Schering-Plough Corp., Gilead Sciences are based in the US whereas the remaining four—Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche Pharmaceuticals, EMD Serono, and Millennium are headquartered outside of the US. For the first time, eight of the top 20 are located outside the United States.

In case you were wondering, Genentech was ranked number 1. This is the fifth time out of the past 6 years that the San-Francisco based company made it to the number one slot (it fell to second last year). Another notable is Massachusetts-based Genzyme which made it to the number 3 spot (out of 575 companies) for the second consecutive year. Surprisingly, Monsanto, the company that makes genetically modified seed crops, was number 2—this despite all of the negative press about genetically modified foods. Let see whether or not Genentech can retain its number 1 ranking after the Roche takeover of the company is completed.

Until next time....

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

 

New Webinar and Conference Offerings from Next Level Pharma

NextLevel Pharma has organized several life sciences meetings that may be of interest to BioJobBlog readers. These include: a webinar entitled “Safety Biomarkers in Drug Development” on October 14 and 21, 2009; a conference, “Best Practices in Phase IV Clinical and Observational Research” December 3-4, 2009 in Prague, Czech Republic and “Advancing Biologics from the Lab to the Clinic", January 11-12, 2010 in Brussels, Belgium.

Each of these offerings offers ideas and insights into important issues that are emerging in the life sciences industry. Check it out!

Until next time....

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

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Pharma Downsizing Update: More Pink Slips at Eli Lilly & Co

Eli Lilly & Co announced today that it is eliminating another 5,500 jobs or roughly 14% of its global workforce over the next two years. This would reduce to size of Lilly’s worldwide workforce from 40,500 to 35,000 by 2011. In addition to the job cuts, the company is reorganizing itself into 5 business units and hopes to save about $1.0 billion in annual costs.

These newly announced job cuts come after the company eliminated 4,000 sales representative jobs this past August and restructured its sale force. Also, prior to the recent cuts, Lilly launched the Lilly Phenotypic Drug Discovery Initiative or PD2 a new program to ostensibly strengthen relationships with academic institutions to speed drug discovery and thereby reduce its reliance on internal drug discovery efforts to keep its pipeline full.

Unlike other major pharmaceutical companies that conducted massive layoffs over the past two years, Lilly was content, until the past few months, to lay off small numbers of employees and offer others retirement packages. Unfortunately, the loss of patent protection on several of its blockbuster drugs coupled with generic encroachment on several brands and impending health care reform, forced Lilly to take more draconian action.

Layoffs have been something of rarity in the life sciences sector over the past eight months or so, but this is usually the time that marks the beginning of the corporate “layoff season.” Don’t be surprised if other large life sciences companies announce similar layoffs in the coming months. Luckily, the economy seems to be improving and there are signs that hiring is beginning to ramp up in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and devices industries.

Speaking of pink slips, those of you who have been downsized or find yourself out of a life sciences job may be interested in a new organization called Pink Slip mixers. According to a description on the group’s website:

“Our Pink Slip Mixers are about hundreds of professional, mid- to upper-level executives who are (might be) victims of the "economic downturn" of 2008. Our parties are about banding together, networking and bonding with the recently "Pinked". We will share our experiences of why we were let off, what companies are hiring, and the "buzz words" that specific hiring managers want to hear. Aside from the usual imbibing, commiseration and fun that every pink slip party brings, headhunters, direct-hire companies, and recruiting firms will also on-hand to learn a little bit more about what you do. Maybe you'll meet a new contact, or find a new job!” 

Sounds like these mixers might be good networking opportunities and a place to kick back and commiserate with others who are no longer gainfully employed. I am planning to attend a Pink Slip Mixer when one is organized in the NYC metropolitan area. Like many of you, I lost my full time contract copywriting job over a year ago!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Podcast: Putting Social Media to Work for Pharma

Lisa Roner, blogger and editor for EyeforPharma, recommends a podcast on social media that was created by Dr. Andree Bates, CEO at Eularis, a company that applies analytics to determine the sales impact of specific marketing programs.

Dr. Bates says it is an important area for pharmas to become engaged in social media.  In the podcast, she offers some ideas about how pharma marketers might apply these channels effectively. Also, she offers some tips and hints for intrepid pharma employees who are interested in getting started.

To listen to the podcast click here.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Networking!!!!!!!!

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Why Bioscientists Aren't Warming to Social Media

BioCrowd co-founder, Vincent Racaniello, and I were chatting the other day with Crowdvine’s Tony Stubblebine (the guy who created the BioCrowd software platform) about the reluctance of scientists to embrace social media. Both Vincent and I, both scientists ourselves, posited that scientists are simply asocial or at the very least not comfortable engaging in social activities whether they be online or IRL. Tony, a self-anointed software geek, wasn’t buying into to our argument and noted that even software geeks are social!

This prompted me to do a little research and I found a blog post written by Nachiket Vartak a blogger and doctoral student at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Physiology. While the blog post focused mainly on reasons why bioscientists won’t use Twitter, I think that many of his observations can be used to generally describe the chilly relationship between many scientists and social media. Before you read on, I must inform you that I paraphrased and embellished some of Nachiket’s original ideas on the subject. That said, here are some of the reasons why bioscientists may not use social media.

1. The reputation of social networking sites
Many scientists disdain social networks because they believe that social networking sites and microblogging platforms like Twitter are nothing more than places to waste time. Those scientists who use social media usually do it in-between experiments and when planning activities which usually involve copious quantities of alcohol, for after laboratory hours fun. In other words, social media is for fun not for work. Also, many so-called serious scientists contend that “real science discussions” only happen on closed e-mailing lists or forums and not in the “open” on social networking sites.

2. The social activation barrier
According to Nachiket, the stereotype that scientists are asocial is well.....err...true! He asserts that many scientists feel more comfortable focusing on themselves (and their research) rather than interacting with others to learn what they have to say or what they may be thinking. And, many times, unless an individual can demonstrate that they are “smart” they probably aren’t worse listening to anyway. Finally, scientists train for years to become independent investigators. Not surprisingly, there is very little emphasis and importance placed on teamwork or social interactions with others scientists or lay people for that matter. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that many scientists aren’t particularly social or inclined to participate in extracurricular social activities.

3. Privacy aka “secrecy”
Science is a highly competitive endeavor and, in many cases, the discoveries that are made represent many years of sacrifice, blood, sweat and tears. With this in mind, nobody wants to be scooped or beat out by their competitors. Consequently, scientists are generally instructed to be very hush-hush when it comes to sharing any information or data that might give the competition a “leg up” in the competition. Any leak, large or small, could mean the difference between fame and failure and, perhaps more importantly, a successful career as a scientist.

In marked contrast, the success of social media is contingent upon its openness, sharing and transparency. Thus, as Nachiket aptly pointed out social media is antithetical to the very nature of science and scientists.

4. Legitimate channels of communication
The only acceptable and legitimate means of scientific communications are presentations at meetings and publications in peer reviewed journals. These forms of communication are the lifeblood of scientific community and critical to the success of all scientists. If you aren’t published, you have no credibility as a scientist. The scientific publishing and communication industry is big business and “the rules of engagement” in the industry have been well established and institutionalized. Unfortunately, social media threatens to destabilize the science publishing world both financially and philosophically and possibly change the way science information is communicated. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that there is little support for social media in scientific publishing world and the science community in general.

While the number of science blogs and podcasts continue to increase daily, scientific social networking sites continue to struggle. This is because the information flow in blogs and similar forms of social media can be easily monitored and controlled. This is not the case for social networking sites like BioCrowd and microblogging platforms like Twitter.
However, if scientists are truly asocial beings then none of the existing science social networking sites will gain traction and be successful. Call me crazy, but I think social networking is an ideal medium for scientists to exchange information, ideas and develop relationships that can help them jumpstart their careers!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Networking!!!!!!!!!!


 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

The Who's Who of Scientists on Twitter

Berci Meskó author of the Science Roll blog recently compiled a list of sites that keep track of the scientists who use Twitter. He recommends: Science Pond (real time), Sciencebase (compilation) and for those of you with a medical bent the Medical Student Blog (compilation). And, for a list of medical journals that are tweeting check out this site. While the lists aren’t comprehensive you might be able to find friends, colleagues and journal editors who use Twitter.

Hat tip to Berci!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Scientists and Twitter: What Is It Good For?

During my recent trip to Vermont and Woodstock, NY I had several conversations about Twitter. Surprisingly, I was being asked to explain Twitter to my nephews, both of whom are in their early 20s and to family friends who are in their late 40s and beyond. Also, at several recent science career fairs that I attended many graduate students and postdocs had never heard of Twitter or it they had, they don’t use it. Initially, this was puzzling but after considering the most recent Twitterverse demographics –I think the average age of Twitter users is around 35 to 40—it made more sense to me.

Anyhow, I have found that it is time consuming to explain Twitter to people who have heard about it but don’t quite understand how it works. To that end, several people— who I follow on Twitter— (@ LaurieDesAutels and @Recruiting Animal) tweeted about an article by John C. Dvorak that offers an excellent review of Twitter and several practical ways to use it.

I hope that the article provides some insights into Twitter and how scientists might be able to harness its incredible power and reach. You can follow me on Twitter @biojobblog!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Tweeting!!!

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Back By Popular Demand: Resume Writing for Scientists

Like it or not, writing a carefully-constructed resume or curriculum vitae (as resumes are known in scientific circles) is a vital part of any successful job search. Inexperienced job seekers tend to hastily craft resumes without paying much attention to format, style or content and then wonder why they can’t land job interviews. The best way to approach resume writing is to think of a resume as a work of art–something that requires a lot of thought, creativity and attention to detail. As one well-known professional recruiter and job search expert put it”Trying to find a job without a smart, well-crafted resume is like showing up for dinner at a fancy restaurant in a T-shirt and cutoffs. They won’t let you in.” 

I think that it is important for job seekers to think of a resume as a personal marketing brochure that will either land a job candidate interviews or turn a job search into a long, arduous and frustrating process.

The primary goal of a resume is to show prospective employers how you are different than other applicants and why you and not they ought to get the job! So, what are the salient features of a winning resume?

Writing tips

Hiring managers, professional recruiters and human resource professionals tend to quickly scan resumes that they receive and make snap judgments. Therefore, your qualifications and personal attributes must “jump off the paper.” This can easily be accomplished by using bold type, headings, underlining, bulleting and varying font sizes–all of which are simple ways to visually call attention to your strengths. Avoid using paragraphs because they are dense and difficult for hiring managers to navigate.

Powerful, action-oriented, emotional words produce a strong, positive impression. Unfortunately, we scientists have been trained to write in the “passive voice.” That said; try to resist using the passive voice as much as possible when crafting your resume–think outside the box!

Job Objective or Summary Statement

I am sure that somebody has told you at one time or another to include an “objective” on your resume. Objectives tend to be boring, vague and passively delivered. Instead, I highly recommend that you craft a vibrant, action-oriented, can-do “Summary of Qualifications” that accurately reflects and highlights why you are a “right fit” candidate for the job. To that end, it may be necessary to craft more than one summary of qualifications if you are applying for several different types of jobs. For example, your summary statement for an R&D job should be markedly different than the one that you would use to land a business development job.

Which of the following examples do you think better positions the job candidate?

Objective: To obtain a research scientist position at a pharmaceutical company

Or

Summary of QualificationsExperienced scientist with expertise in protein purification and microarray technology. Exceptional leadership abilities and outstanding oral and written communication skills. Able to work independently or as part of a multidisciplinary team.

Professional Experience

Resumes can be constructed either chronologically or functionally. Chronological resumes, which are most common, list content in temporal order and should be used for either lateral job moves or when seeking a promotion or looking for a new job to advance your career. When crafting a chronological resume, jobs or work experience must be listed from most recent to past. In contrast, functional resumes offer content based on skills and are most effective for individuals who are seeking career changes. Functional resumes should present your skills in the order of importance for the new career that you are pursuing. 

It is important to stress that only information relevant to the position should be included in a resume. Unrelated job titles or skills can sometimes confuse hiring managers and may cause them to pass on a qualified candidate. As mentioned above, most hiring managers and employers are simply too busy to read all of the resumes that they receive. Resumes that are chosen for further considerations are typically the ones that contain pertinent, job-specific information that is presented in a straightforward and unambiguous manner.

If you switch jobs frequently or have gaps in your experience put the dates of employment in the far right hand column of the resume (we read from left to right so sometimes dates of employment are overlooked) or hide the job-changing by combining or grouping several jobs together to appear as one. Also, employment dates ought to be listed as years; not the exact start and stop dates of employment, e.g., dates should appear as 2001-2002 not July 10, 2001-January 15, 2002.

Tailoring Your Resume

A resume is not just a list of what you have done and where you have been. It is your opportunity to present and highlight the skills that you possess and how those skills translate into making you the right-fit candidate for a particular job. Quantifying or embellishing achievements and using strong, definitive statements elevate and add authenticity to you as a job candidate.

Which of these examples sounds better?

Designed and directed experiments to study Alzheimer’s disease

                                                            Or

Designed and carried out experiments that identified a key protein in amyloid plaque formation

For each position that you apply, it is critically important to list all relevant experience in the order of perceived importance to the hiring manager or employer. Carefully reviewing job descriptions will allow you to quickly and easily identify those things that are most important to the employer. What is seen first means the most! 

When necessary resumes should be tailored so that as many of your skill sets and accomplishments match what was stated in the job description. This means, that it is highly unlikely that you will be able to use the same resume/CV for all of the jobs that you are interested in. To insure success, I highly recommend that you take the time to customize or tailor each resume/CV that you submit to prospective employers.  When I was looking for a new job several years ago, I crafted no fewer than 20 different resumes!

Odds n Ends

Many of you may have heard that resumes should be no longer than one or two pages in length. While this may be the convention for other fields, it is certainly not applicable to CVs or scientific resumes. That said, it is a good idea to limit the length of your CV/resume because, outside of academic circles, nobody has the time nor the inclination to read a CV that is half an inch thick! When I was working as a professional recruiter, it typically took me a minute or less after scanning a resume/CV to determine whether I had identified a “right-fit” candidate. Candidates whose CVs are too long, overly verbose or difficult to decipher rarely make it to the interview stage. I subscribe to the notion that less is more and simple is elegant!

When listing your educational background, I recommend that present your lowest degree first (associate or bachelor) and end with your most advanced degree or educational experience, e.g. postdoctoral fellowships or professional school. The name and location of the institution that awarded the degree and your major or area of expertise should be listed with each. It is perfectly reasonable to list the names of your graduate or postdoctoral advisor in this section (if you think that a mention will help your candidacy). You may also want to include your thesis title if you wrote a masters or PhD thesis. It is not necessary to list the dates that the degree was awarded. By listing the dates that you received your undergraduate and graduate degrees, an employer may be able to deduce your age. While this may not be a bad thing for entry level employees, it may hinder more experienced job seekers from securing new positions.

Membership in professional societies, organizations or clubs should be listed in a section that is separate from your educational background. Any invited lectures or presentations may also be listed under a separate heading. Also, it is important to list any extracurricular activities or specialized skill sets that you think may be relevant to the positions that for which you are applying. For example, letting prospective employers know that you were an Olympic swimmer or president of the debate team may be what differentiates you from other equally-qualified job candidates.

All of your publications should be listed on the last page of your CV in a section entitled Publications.  If you are just starting your career, it is permissible to list along with your peer reviewed publications all of your abstracts, poster presentations, etc. However, if you are mid-career professional, I strongly recommend that you list only peer-reviewed publications, review articles, books and book chapters and eschew the abstracts. Any manuscripts that are “in press” should be listed. That said,  I don’t think that it is appropriate to include “submitted” manuscripts –this signals to prospective employers that you may not think that your publication list is long enough to warrant consideration.

Never send your references to prospective employers unless they specifically ask for them. Simply indicate somewhere on your resume/CV that references are available upon request. For most academic jobs, it is customary to ask for references at the beginning of the application process. For industrial jobs, references are not requested unless an employer is interested in moving forward with specific job candidates.

Finally, it is vital that you understand that your resume is a required first step in the job search process. A carefully crafted resume/CV that indicates to prospective employers that you are the right woman/man for the job will likely get you to the interview stage. After that…it is all up to you.   Look for the next installment of the series on interviewing skills and tips.

Click here to see the wrong way to write a resume and here for an example of one that resulted in a job offer.

Until next time….

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

 

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Keeping Your Resume Fresh

While the economy is showing signs of a possible recovery, the unemployment numbers continue to rise. For this reason, it is a good idea to keep your resume as up-to-date as possible. Yes, I know it is a hassle to update and stay on top of you resume especially if you already have a job. However, in these uncertain financial times, you never know when you might be back on the job market. To that end, I highly recommend a piece on refreshing a resume written by Kim Issacs of Monster.com

In her post, Kim provide some insights and advice on how to keep your resume up-to-date--or fresh as we say in the recruiting business--with minimum pain or effort.

Check it out!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Adverse Event Reporting, Social Media and Pharma

Pharmaceutical,biotechnology and other companies that sell prescription drugs and devices are deathly afraid of adverse events (AEs) associated with their products. For those of you who may not know, companies with approved prescription drugs and medical devices are required to track and report any adverse events associated with their products to regulatory agencies like the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). If FDA receives enough AE complaints about a product, the agency will investigate to determine whether or not there may be efficacy, safety or tolerability issues with it. And, if FDA thinks that the AEs are legitimate, it may ask a company to conduct Phase IV clinical trials with the product in question or require that changes be made to the product’s label. Not surprisingly, these outcomes can be time consuming and perhaps more importantly, costly. Label changes—especially for blockbuster products—frequently lead to changes in physician prescribing habits which can translate into a loss of revenue. Despite the fact that ALL drugs exhibit AEs, many companies falsely cling to the hope that there will be few, if any, AEs reported for their products.

While drug makers are very familiar with the range of possible AEs associated with their drugs—all AEs for a drug are identified and reported during clinical trials—pharmaceutical executives are concerned about social media activities, because they fear that than the number and frequency of AEs reported for their products will increase. This, in turn, would prompt FDA and other regulatory agencies to investigate and more closely scrutinize their marketed products. As Jonathan Richman, author of the Dose of Digital Blog points out in an excellent post entitled the “Myth of Adverse Event Reporting” AEs are a fact of life for prescription drugs. And, that social media may help to improve adverse reporting. Like Jonathan, I contend that social media might allow drug makers to more effectively identify potential safety issues with a product earlier in its lifecycle and thereby minimize possible deleterious effects of the drug on certain patient populations. I think that drug manufacturers ought to begin to consider how they might effectively use social media to improve AE reporting rather than ignore the potential upside of this new medium.

The Myth of Adverse Event Reporting

Adverse Events are nothing more than negative reviews. If you want people to genuinely talk about your brand, they are going to say negative things. But how often do posts include adverse events? Nielsen decided to take a look at this rather than simply assume it was ” a lot,” which of course is a difficult number to manage. Nielsen looked at Yahoo Health boards and took 500 postings. Of these, only 1 contained enough information to qualify as an adverse event that needed to be reported. That’s 0.2%. Why so low? Turns out that someone simply saying that your drug caused them to have a headache isn’t enough to qualify as an adverse event. Nielsen summed up the pieces of information required to report an adverse event and there are four pieces: “(i) an identifiable patient; (ii) an identifiable reporter; (iii) a specific drug or biologic involved in the event; and (iv) an adverse event or fatal outcome.” (Hat tip to Pharma 2.0 for the summary). The study showed that one or two of these pieces were often available, but not all four. In addition, they found that it would be impossible to get all four even with some effort. In fact, the FDA says, “[Without these pieces] a report on the incident should not be submitted to the FDA because reports without such information make interpretation of their significance difficult, at best, and impossible, in most instances.”

This is because people often don’t register or leave their personal information in a post, so there is no way for a company to follow up and fill in the blanks. Naturally, if there is something significant, every effort should be made, but on the often anonymous Internet, this is usually difficult. Suppose for a moment there were several adverse events that need to be reported. How often do they need to be reported? The FDA is pretty clear on this. For new drugs, reports need to be filed quarterly for three years. After that, it’s annually. For “serious and unexpected” events, these have to be reported within 15 days. However, there’s a pretty high threshold for an adverse event to be considered “serious and unexpected.” Every company already has these reporting channels in place, so it is simply a matter of including adverse events received from social media into the workstream. 

Yes, it’s a balance. The fact is adverse events should not be the reason why healthcare shies away from social media. These risks can easily be mitigated and, if done right, can actually be used in a positive way. So, don’t use adverse events as an excuse anymore. You’ve got the data. 1 in 500 posts include a reportable event. You report quarterly at most (which you’re doing anyway). How much ongoing effort do your other marketing programs require? Probably quite a bit more than this. Next time you hear this excuse, you’ve got the data to dispel the myth of adverse event reporting.

Until next time...

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

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Social Media and Pharmacovigilance

Mark Senak, author of the EyeonFDA blog and social media enthusiast, posted a great piece about pharma’s reluctance to adopt social media and the changes in adverse event reporting-- aka pharmacovigilance--requirements that may change this attitude. 

Hat tip to Mark!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

The Who's Who of Social Media, Pharma and Healthcare

I met Jonathan Richman,the author of the Dose of Digital blog, last week at the BDI Conference (#BDI) on Social Communication and Healthcare in NYC. BTW, for those of you who were unable to attend, you missed an informative and compelling meeting on the status of social media in the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries. Anyway back to Jonathan. He gave a great talk on pharma and social media which prompted me to visit his blog. While perusing Dose of Digital, I came upon a wiki that Jonathan maintains called --what else-- the Pharma and Healthcare Social Media Wiki.” 

It’s a comprehensive, cataloged list of social media initiatives underway at pharma, biotech and healthcare industries. Noticeably absent from the wiki, are social networking sites like BioCrowd that were specifically created for life scientists and other bioprofessionals. Hey, wait a minute, aren’t scientists the lifeblood of the life sciences industry? Would there be a life sciences industry without scientists? Hmmmm....I will have to talk to Jonathan about this!

I highly recommend you check out the wiki if you are a life sciences social media enthusiast!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Social Media Hunting!!!!!  

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Several US Legislators Begin to Seriously Scrutinize Direct-to-Consumer Advertising

Until today, direct-to-consumer advertising (DTC) has received very little attention during the recent spate of debates over healthcare reform. The NY Times reports that several members of Congress are introducing legislation that would curb the reach of DTC advertising. While reasons for introduction of new legislation vary—ranging from moral indignation over the mention of four hour erections during prime time to tax deductions for pharma companies that engage in DTC advertising—it appears that no stone will be unturned during the ongoing debate over US healthcare reform.

For those of you who may not know, DTC advertising is allowed in only two countries—New Zealand and the US. According to a Nielson Media Research report, in 2008 drug makers spent about $4.8 billion on DTC advertising for television, radio and print ads in magazines and newspapers. Not surprisingly, supporters of DTC point out that the amount of money spent by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies on DTC advertising is negligible as percentage of total health care spending. Nevertheless, data convincingly show that DTC advertising can increase the number of prescriptions written for newly approved drugs. Of the $235 billion spent on prescription drugs last year, approximately $8 billion was attributed to DTC advertising.

Although some academic studies suggest that DTC advertising can help people who need to start taking drugs and others to remain compliant with existing treatment regimens, the lack of fair balance in many DTC ads that promote drug benefits and downplay risks is what is driving legislation to curb its use. The recent brouhahas over Pfizer’s Lipitor commercials, Bayer Pharmaceuticals’ ad that deceptively promoted its popular birth control drug Yaz and Merck and Schering Plough’s Vytorin ads that overstated the health benefits of the cholesterol lowering drug have convinced legislators that DTC must be fixed.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Division of Drug Advertising Marketing and Communications (DDMAC) oversees and has full responsibility for DTC advertising. However, it is important to note, that under current regulations, companies aren’t required to get approval from the agency before they appear. Sharing DTC ads with FDA is completely voluntary. However, if FDA receives enough complaints about particular ads, DDMAC will review them and notify the company if regulators believe that they contain information that is misleading, unbalanced or unsubstantiated. Companies that violate DDMAC policies and guidelines are typically required to show run all future DTC ads by FDA regulators before they can shown to the public.

Because of the small numbers of patients that are typically used during clinical evaluation of new drugs, it may take as long as five years before side effects and problems with certain drugs begin to emerge. With this in mind, DTC critics argue that there ought to be a five year waiting period or moratorium on DTC advertising after a drug is approved. Interestingly, about ten years ago, a friend who works for a major pharmaceutical company told me that she always waits five years before using a newly approved drug.  At the time, I thought it was an odd thing for her to say since she had been in the business for over 15 years. However over the past five years or so, several high profile drugs that were heavily promoted by DTC advertising had to be withdrawn from the market. To that end, while DTC advertising may be “great for business,” it may not always be in the best interest of American consumers who use prescription drugs!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Several Ways That Pharma Can Harness the Power of Social Media

The debate, if you can call it that, over whether or not interactive social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter can be used in the life science industry is moving forward at glacial speed. I decided that it was time to propose some ideas rather than continue to admonish the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a lack of guidance.

There are several reasons which may explain the inertia surrounding the adoption of social media by pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices and diagnostics companies. First, and perhaps foremost, FDA has been consistently reluctant to craft any useful guidance on the use of Web 2.0 technologies for research, clinical or promotional purposes. The FDA’s Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications (DDMAC) is still trying to figure out how to regulate website content. Is it any wonder that FDA is reluctant to tackle the regulatory implications and issues associated with social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter? Second, a majority of social media advocates— who are leading the charge at many life sciences companies—are marketing and advertising executives who tend to look at social media strictly as a promotional tool. Finally, much of what takes place at life sciences companies is proprietary and confidential—information flow between the company and its employees and the public is fastidiously monitored and tightly regulated. Because of this, the life sciences industry’s “process” is intentionally opaque—which is contrary to the goals of social media which is to promote transparency (or the illusion of it).

There is no doubt that the life sciences industry is the most highly regulated industry on the planet. While this represents a formidable challenge for adoption of social media, it is by no means insurmountable—especially if social media is used for purposes other than branding, marketing and advertising. For example, the most straight forward application of social media at life sciences companies would be in the areas of corporate recruitment and employee retention. Many Fortune 500 companies outside of the life sciences industry have been using Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn for years for recruiting purposes. While not commonly acknowledged, life sciences companies have quietly begun to use Facebook, LinkedIn and MySpace to recruit prospective employees. Interestingly, the new kid on the block—Twitter—looks to potentially be a more powerful recruiting tool than any of its predecessors. Unfortunately, employee retention is no longer a priority at many companies. However, before the economic meltdown a number of companies, most notably Best Buy, were experimenting with social media to retain talented employees.

Another potential use of social media is for pharmacovigilance and adverse events reporting. Companies with approved products on the market are required by FDA (and other regulatory agencies that approved their products) to set up post marketing surveillance programs for adverse events reporting. By law, companies that receive adverse events reports from consumers, physicians or other entities must report them to the regulatory agencies that approved the product. Regulatory agencies maintain adverse events databases for all approved drugs and devices to monitor drug safety.  If designed and implemented correctly, interactive social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter (which operates in real-time) would make excellent pharmacovigilance and adverse reporting tools. Quite coincidentally, John Mack, who runs the Pharma Marketing Blog, reported a partnership between UCB and PatientsLikeMe.com to create a pharmacovigilance reporting platform for UCB products.

Recruiting patients for participation in clinical trials (to assess efficacy and safety of prospective new drugs) has become extremely challenging over the past few years.Traditional patient recruitment strategies include print, television and radio ads and in some instances, websites. All of these recruitment methods are costly, labor intensive and limited in their effectiveness because they only reach small number of prospective clinical trial participants. I contend that Facebook with over 200 million users, LinkedIn with members in over 140 different countries and Twitter which is growing rapidly would be ideal for clinical trial recruitment and retention purposes. Others have also proposed this idea.

Finally, while the use of social media to promote approved drugs and devices may be difficult because of regulatory constraints, it can be utilized to keep the public informed about prospective new medicines and promote a company’s image or brand. There is no question that the public perception of the pharmaceutical industry has been severely tarnished over the last few years.  The industry’s continued lack of transparency and failure to adequately disclose potential safety risks about some approved products continues perpetuate a negative image. One way to restore public trust and confidence is to use social media to actively engage the public in conversation on wellness, addressing unmet medical needs and prospective new medicines and treatments that are being developed. Also, social media platforms could be employed to showcase community outreach programs and discuss educational initiatives to improve science education and training.

Social media is no longer a new phenomenon or technology. It is a legitimate form of communication which has become an integral part of the Web 2.0 experience. I suspect that the life sciences industry will have to make a decision about social media in the not so distant future—or possibly miss a potentially game-changing business opportunity. And, as Ken Kesey aptly said in Tom Wolfe’s ‘The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test’—“You’re either on the bus…or off the bus.”

 Until next time...

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

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Pharma Flocking to Social Media?

Mark Sendak, a social media enthusiast and author of the Eye on FDA blog, wrote a great post today about an article he saw in the Washington Post entitled “Drug Firms Jockey for Space Online.”

Mark wrote: “Flock?  Flock?  FLOCK?  The only way you could use the term "flock" in connection with pharmaceutical firms and social media is to say that companies are a scared flock of geese.” He goes on to castigate FDA’s Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications (DDMAC) for a lack of a coherent regulatory framework and guidance for the use of social media in the life sciences industry.

Mark aptly describes DDMAC’s guidance surrounding social media and the pharmaceutical industry this way. “No one knows, and DDMAC apparently makes this stuff up as they go along. That is the kind of Whack-a-Mole game DDMAC plays.  We won't tell you what is off limits, until you do it and then WHACK! Is this anyway to run a pharmaceutical industry?

I am in total agreement with Mark on this issue. Despite the rapid adoption of social media by other industries, FDA has consistently been reluctant to issue any regulatory guidance what so ever on the topic despite assertions to the contrary. Unfortunately, when it comes to social media and the pharmaceutical industry, FDA’s usual approach to regulatory guidance—reactive rather than proactive—is still alive and well. As you may recall FDA previously sent warning letters to no fewer than 14 pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies admonishing them on their placement of product ads on search engine results pages. The fact that 14 different companies received warning letters on this issue reflects the confusion and lack of guidance offered by FDA on social media and the use of Web 2.0 technologies to promote or support the sale pharmaceutical products.

The growing popularity and inevitability of social media suggests that DDMAC officials along with industry representatives must begin to consider crafting a preliminary regulatory framework for its use in the life sciences industry. Like it or not, social media is here to stay!

Hat tip to EyeonFDA!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Changing and Revitalizing Graduate Education in the Life Sciences

Over the past several years, I have publicly called for fundamental changes in graduate education and training for life scientists. To that end, I was delighted to read an OP-ED piece in today’s New York Times entitled “End Universities as We Know It” written by Professor Mark C. Taylor, Chairperson of the religion department at Columbia University. 

In his post, Professor Taylor recommended several fundamental and systemic changes that ought to improve the likelihood that graduate students and postdoctoral fellows find jobs at the end of their graduate education. While some of Dr. Taylor’s ideas are novel and innovative, two in particular; 1) expanding the range of career opportunities for graduate students and postdocs and 2) abolishing tenure and mandatory retirement; are ones that I have suggested many times in the past few years. Rather than paraphrase, I decided to repost what Dr Taylor said about these two very important, seminal issues.

Expand the range of professional options for graduate students

Most graduate students will never hold the kind of job for which they are being trained. It is, therefore, necessary to help them prepare for work in fields other than higher education. The exposure to new approaches and different cultures and the consideration of real-life issues will prepare students for jobs at businesses and nonprofit organizations. Moreover, the knowledge and skills they will cultivate in the new universities will enable them to adapt to a constantly changing world.

Impose mandatory retirement and abolish tenure

Initially intended to protect academic freedom, tenure has resulted in institutions with little turnover and professors impervious to change. After all, once tenure has been granted, there is no leverage to encourage a professor to continue to develop professionally or to require him or her to assume responsibilities like administration and student advising. Tenure should be replaced with seven-year contracts, which, like the programs in which faculty teach, can be terminated or renewed. This policy would enable colleges and universities to reward researchers, scholars and teachers who continue to evolve and remain productive while also making room for young people with new ideas and skills.

For many years now, I have been struggling with the moral and ethical obligations of graduate education. Recently, I came to the conclusion that it is our role as educators to selflessly impart knowledge and training to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows so that they can pursue the careers (and lives) that many have trained for a decade or more. I think Professor Taylor’s view of the role of an educator says it best: “Do not do what I do; rather, take whatever I have to offer and do with it what I could never imagine doing and then come back and tell me about it.” This is the attitude that must be by academicians if America wants to remain competitive in the life sciences.

Until next time....

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

 

The Biggest Loser.....Roche!

The New York Times reported today that Genentech’s blockbuster cancer treatment, Avastin, failed to show a significant effect on preventing the recurrence of colon cancer, limiting its utility as an adjunct treatment to treat primary colorectal cancer. While Avastin is already a best-selling cancer treatment, success in this closely watched and highly visible clinical trial could have paved the way to a new uses of the drug, potentially increasing sales by billions of dollars a year.

Avastin had sales of $2.7 billion in the United States alone last year. But it is currently approved only for late-stage colon, breast and lung cancers. For those indications, patient’s lives have been prolonged for up to a few months. The new trial was designed to determine whether or not Avastin could be used earlier in the course of the disease, right after surgery to remove the tumor. The hope of such so-called adjuvant therapy is to prevent the cancer from coming back at all, effectively curing the patient.

While the Avastin failure will have little or no effect on Genentech’s financial outlook, it does call into question whether or not Roche paid too much last month to buy the 44 percent of Genentech it did not already own. Roche has long insisted that its desire to own all of Genentech did not hinge on the results of this trial. And yet, the trial appeared to play a major role in Roche’s months-long negotiations with Genentech.  It appeared that Roche, which had started those discussions last summer, wanted to complete the deal before results of the Avastin trial were announced — on the assumption that a successful trial would have sent Genentech’s stock soaring, possibly putting the takeover price it offered out of reach.  A failed trial, on the other hand, could have pushed down the value of Genentech’s stock. So it now looks as if Roche could have paid less had the results of the Avastin trial come out before it completed the deal.

Art Levinson, Genentech’s former CEO who played hardball with Roche over the course of negotiations, needs to be recognized for his outstanding business acumen. He and other Genentech executives convinced Roche that Avastin sales could quadruple, to $10 billion, by 2015 if the drug could be used for early-stage colon, lung and breast cancers. This possibility induced Roche to raise its bid for Genentech’s outstanding shares from $86.50 to $95 per share. Although Dr. Levinson wasn’t able to fend off Roche’s takeover and is no longer Genetech's CEO, he is likely “laughing all the way to the bank” as the expression goes. And, who said that PhDs aren’t any good at business?

Roche shares were down more than 10 percent on Wednesday, closing at $29.54.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!


SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Twitter and Pharma: Which Companies Tweet the Most?

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, BIwhich 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?) 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Why Downsizing May Hurt Pharma

Since 2007, approximately 80,000 pharmaceutical jobs have been eliminated. The recent consolidation in the industry, e.g., Merck-Schering, Pfizer-Wyeth and Roche-Genentech suggests that many more life sciences jobs will be lost over the next year or so. Typically, to avoid law suits and possible discrimination claims, most companies will layoff a mixture of experienced and entry level employees that cover the racial, religious and age spectra. For those of you who may not know, Americans who are 40 and older constitute a “protected class of employees.” In other words, companies that layoff employees cannot disproportionately give pink slips to employees 40 years of age or older. This law was enacted because older employees typically have higher salaries and have accrued more benefits and vacation time than their more junior counterparts and eliminating them can drastically cut costs. While most companies are careful to layoff a mixture of junior and senior employees during large layoffs, a quick perusal of the demographics of employees who lose their jobs reveals that many of them are older, more experienced workers. Sacrificing a few entry level employees (to prevent any red flags) is worth it to the accountants who charged with cutting costs and orchestrating large corporate layoffs.

Unlike consumer goods, pharmaceutical and biotechnology drug development is arcane, complex and may take up to 15 years to complete. There are many “go” or “no go” decisions that must be made during the drug development process. Typically, these decisions are rendered by experienced employees who have been “down the road” many times before and are able to recognize the oft-time nuanced attributes of successful drug candidates. Without the benefit of these employee and their experiences, drug companies may struggle to make the “right decisions” for new products being developed. Also, the loss of experienced employees can disrupt the flow of essential “corporate knowledge” to entry level and more junior employees. This is important because— while most entry level and junior employees are academically and technically qualified—it usually takes them years (under the tutelage of mentors and senior employees) to understand a company’s best practices. Put simply, the unrelenting loss of experienced pharmaceutical workers can alter the standing or dominance of pharmaceutical companies in certain therapeutic areas. While massive layoffs of experienced pharmaceutical employees bolster drug stock prices in the short term, the long term effects of these layoffs on the overall health of the pharmaceutical industry remains uncertain.

Jeff Kindler, Pfizer’s CEO, mentioned yesterday during a CNBC interview, that eight Wyeth senior executives will keep their jobs after the Pfizer-Wyeth deal closes later this year. Not surprisingly, he failed to mention how many “rank and file” employees of the combined company would keep their jobs after the merger. Don’t be shocked when Pfizer-Wyeth announces massive layoffs after the deal closes—Pfizer’s stock price has fallen 21% since it announced the Wyeth acquisition late last fall.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

FDA Chides 14 Drug Makers for Misleading Internet Ads

Today's New York Times reported that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued warning letters and ordered 14 pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to stop running what it calls misleading ads on internet search pages displayed by search engines like Google. The agency faulted the companies for failing to identify product names (brand) and not listing potential side effects (only benefits) for the drugs. In other words, the ads lacked “fair balance” something that FDA stresses and that all drug makers are very familiar with. 

Drug makers and other interest groups pay search engines like Google to place ads on search result pages after someone types in a related search word. The sidebar ads typically contain a eye-catching headline about a relevant medical condition or product and links to websites promoting certain products. The companies receiving warning letters included: Bayer, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cephalon, Eli Lilly, Forrest Laboratories, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi-Aventis. Not surprisingly, most of the world’s largest and most profitable were guilty of running misleading Internet search engine ads.

Historically, drug companies and FDA have engaged in a cat and mouse approach when it comes to advertising and marketing drug and medical devices and diagnostics. This is because FDA’s existing regulations that guide marketing and advertising practices are relatively lax and it provides drug makers with the opportunity to see how far they can push the agency before “they get caught.” While this practice may have been acceptable for print and television advertising, it may no longer be appropriate for Internet advertising— which potentially has a much broader and larger reach than traditional media because there are not national borders on the Web. Unfortunately, FDA has been slow (reluctant?) to react to digital media and is even more perplexed about social media and the drug industry. Rather than continue to play cat and mouse, I think it would be in the best interest of consumers if FDA and drug makers would sit down and craft new guidance on regulating Internet advertising and marketing practices. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the old rules are no longer sufficient as digital and social media continue to evolve.

Until next time....

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

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Pharmaceutical Industry Consolidation: A Historical Timeline that Traces Big Pharma's M &A Activity

The old baseball adage which says that  “you can’t tell the players apart without a program” is particularly apt when it comes to tracing the M &A activity that led to the creation of some today's largest pharmaceutical companies.

I used to be able to keep track of all of the moving parts  of most of these mergers but advancing age and unprecedented M&A activity in the pharma industry prevents me from successfully doing this any longer. To that end, about a week ago, the New York Times published a pretty cool and informative chart that historically traces the corporate mergers that lead to creation of Pfizer, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis and others.

Check it out!!!!!

Until next time...

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

 

The Weekly Pharma Merger Roundup

As you all know by now, Merck announced on Monday that it will purchase Schering Plough for $41.1billion in a deal constructed as a reverse merger. The reverse merger strategy was concocted to prevent the new company from losing the international sale rights to Remicade, Johnson and Johnson’s lucrative, blockbuster rheumatoid arthritis drug. According to the original deal inked by Johnson and Johnson and Schering Plough, Schering would have to surrender its rights to Remicade— which generated $2.1 billion in sales outside of the US last year —and golimumab (which is pending approval in Europe) if current ownership of Schering changes. Golimumab (CNTO 148) is Johnson and Johnson’s Centocor division next-generation human anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibody be developed as monthly subcutaneous treatment for adults with active forms of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis.  Since the merger was announced on Monday, Johnson and Johnson hasn’t issued any public statements about the deal—prompting some analysts to speculate that Johnson and Johnson may well make a counteroffer to acquire Schering Plough. Others believe that Johnson and Johnson will challenge the new company’s international rights to Remicade and golimumab despite the great lengths that Merck and Schering Plough management went to structure the acquisition as a reverse merger. Stay tuned for updates.

In other merger news, US-based Gilead announced that it will acquire CV Therapeutics for about $1.4 billion. The deal tops the hostile takeover offer from Astellas Pharma of Japan. Gilead, an HIV drug manufacturer is purchasing CV Therapeutics—which sells the cardiovascular drugs Ranexa (chronic angina) and Lexican (reduces stress during cardiovascular surgical procedures)—to expand its therapeutic repertoire beyond virology. The stock prices of shares of Gilead and CV Therapeutics jumped after the announcement signaling Wall Street’s approval of the deal.   Nevertheless, it may be premature for Gilead and CV Therapeutics to begin celebrating—Astellas may very well tender a counteroffer!

Until next time...

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

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

A Modest Proposal

How many of you read the printed ingredients and nutrition fact boxes found on packaged foods to help you decide which of two similar products you ought to buy? What if the same concept was applied to direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug ads? Do you think that it would be easier to determine which of two similar medications may be best for you? Well, researchers at Dartmouth Medical School think so! And, they are urging the US Food and Drug administration to adopt a similar concept for all DTC advertising.

Based on results from two randomized, clinical studies, the Dartmouth team proposed that numerical tables that quantify the benefits of a drug (compared with placebo) and also the odds of developing certain side effects should be included on DTC advertisements including television, print and web-based ads. In those studies, patients were shown drug ads that did and did not include a fact box. Participants looked at ads (with and without fact boxes) for two similar prescription heartburn medications and two widely prescribed cardiovascular drugs. The trial using the heartburn medications was designed to evaluate consumer decision-making about drugs that are used to treat symptoms whereas the cardiovascular medications trial was used to evaluate decision-making about the use of preventative medications that reduce the risk of future events, e.g., heartache or stroke.

Overall, the researchers said, the addition of facts boxes to prescription drug ads allowed consumers to make better decisions about the choices of drugs for their symptoms and were better informed about the benefits of drugs that could be used for prevention. For example, when asked which drug they would choose for heartburn 68 percent of those who had seen ads with facts boxes picked what the researchers referred to as "the superior drug," as compared with 31 percent of those who had seen ads without facts boxes. Also, about 80 percent of the facts-box group, as compared with 38 percent from the non-fact-box group, knew that both drugs had similar side effects. After looking at cardiovascular drug ads with or without fact-boxes, 72 percent of those who saw ads with facts boxes correctly described the risk reduction associated with both drugs whereas only 9% of non-fact-box participants were able to do this.

DTC advertising is big business—last year the pharmaceutical industry spent approximately $4.8 billion on television and print ads alone. While DTC advertising is known to influence prescription drug sales, it is also somewhat controversial suggested Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine "Direct-to-consumer drug advertising is controversial in medical circles, largely out of concern that drug companies will talk patients into preferences not in their best interest, "But I often encounter the opposite problem in my patients. After hearing the litany of potential side effects of a drug, they absolutely refuse to take it," Katz said. Nevertheless, he and the Dartmouth researchers agree that better-informed patients make better drug choices.

Drs. Woloshin and Schwartz, leaders of the Dartmouth team, are scheduled to present their findings tomorrow to an FDA advisory panel on “risk communication.” The panel is tasked with examining how best to provide consumers with data about prescription drugs using printed matter. 

Adding fact-boxes to print, television or web-based ads won’t substantially increase the cost of creating and producing them. Also, rather than hurt prescription drug sales—what most pharmaceutical companies are worried about—the new approach may be good for the industry. According to Robert Ehrlich, who heads DTC Perspectives, a company that specializes in pharmaceutical marketing, “If there is high benefit and low risk, doctors will prescribe more of the drugs. If there is low benefit and high risks than the drug should probably not be on the market,” said Ehrlich.

Stay tuned for updates.

Until next time...

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

 

Three Ways Pharma uses Facebook

After having looked at pharma’s use of twitter, I decided to also get a feel for how pharma is engaging with facebook so far. Three main uses emerge: 1. connecting employees, 2. attracting talent and 3. promoting disease awareness or treatment adherence

1. Connecting current and ex- employees definately has the most activity. Numerous official and unofficial  groups or fan pages bring together the employees of most of the top pharma companies. For the purpose of this analysis let me concentrate the largest groups with apparent corporate endorsement (ie. use of official logo, links to company website and corporate messaging in group purpose).

Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/Wyeth and Roche seem to be leading the pack in terms of activity. Sanofi and Novartis both set up official fan pages with over one thousand members. Lots of employee activism as well at  Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Novartis and Wyeth with facebook groups of 500+ members. (Check out this video from the official BI facebook group, just for fun).

Other, not so active groups: AstraZeneca (also have an English and French fan page), TevaGSK (French fan page), Lilly, JNJ, and Pfizer.

Interestingly, there are a number of unofficial “Pfizer“ groups expressing negative sentiment towards the company (most of it coming from layed off employees). Pfizer is also the only company that someone set up a group about them, called “conversations of Pfizer“. Not much activity unfortunately, but intersting concept nevertheless.

Another strange aside: Egytian and Turkish country groups seem to exist for basically every pharma company I researched, must be a cultural thing?

2. Regarding attracting talent, there is an overwhelming number of student, intern and training program groups for all companies; most of them probably not official. GSK seems to have the largest number of student groups, a lot of them private. Merck also stands out for its excellent Merck Careers fan page, well done, I think, but not much activity, yet.

3. Promoting disesase awareness is where I believe things finally get interesting for patients. Examples of pharma companies using facebook to drive disease awareness and treatment adherence aare not bountiful, but I did find two great examples.

The first example is the ADHD Moms group, sponsored by McNeil Pediatrics, a JNJ company. The group counts close to 8000 members, but, for me, it is not these numbers that make the group exciting. By setting up this fan page, McNeil has done a great job at creating an environment in which patients/caregivers can receive valuable information concerning treatment management and adherence, while staying within the pharma “comfort zone“.

The concept is simple. One Pediatrician and three ADHD moms, as well as “guest writers“ discuss topics of importance to raising a child with ADHD. There are polls to each topic to get the audience’s feedback, while avoiding  thorny legal issues such as adverse event reporting or off-label usage. The site also offers a podcast series and links to prominent ADHD organizaions.

The second example comes from Novartis Zometa product. It is called: Marica Strassman Takes Role as Patient Advocate. In this group, celebrity and breast cancer survivor Marcia Strassman takes on the mission to “inform breast cancer patients and caregivers about the importance of following treatment regiments outlined by their doctors “. Thus a clear focus on promoting disease awareness and treatment adherence.

The setup up is also highly transparant, clearly disclosing Zometa sponsorship with links to the Zometa homepage, product information and the facebook groupe mission:“ To educate patients with advanced breast cancer and other metastatic cancers about the risks and benefits of Zometa.“

This fan page, like the ADHD example, features links to the most prominent cancer organizations as a further resources for patients. Also, similar to the ADHD page, this site does not allow any comments from its members to prevent any legal issues.

So overall, highly encouraging signs that pharma is starting to use facebook. Most companies still seem to first experiment with more internally focused groups, but some are starting to “test the waters“ and to engage with patients on important topics like disease awareness and treatment adherence.

Silja Chouquet is the owner and CEO of whydot GmbH, an agency specialized in social media consulting, coaching and training. Her fields of expertise are the creation of patient-focused social media communications and marketing campaigns. She runs the whydotpharma blog where she discusses social media and the life sciences and other pharma-related topics.

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Pharma and Twitter

Twitter, the microblogging platform, is the current rage in social media. According to @Shwen, who writes the Med 2.0 Blog, it grew by 752% in 2008. Shwen is a social media enthusiast who is trying to convince the life sciences industry that Twitter and other social networks can be leveraged to improve drug development and deliver healthcare.

According to a recent post on Med. 2.0, there are currently three pharmaceutical companies that are actively using Twitter: Novartis (@novartis), Boehringer Ingelheim (@Boehringer) and Astra Zeneca (AstraZenecaUS). Also, it appears that Johnson and Johnson (@JNJcomm) launched an account last week. Tweets from @novartis and @Boehringer occur fairly regularly whereas AstraZenecaUS tweets are rare. Unlike YouTube, where pharmaceutical sponsors who create channels can regulate and control content, it is much more difficult to manage Twitter because tweets are in real time, uncensored (for the most part) and can be globally disseminated within seconds.

Despite these issues, Med 2.0’s Shwen muses “I can only imagine that more pharma companies are going to be jumping on board the Twitter-train sooner rather than later. How they use it to engage, on the other hand, is going to vary greatly from company to company. At the very least, I see companies setting up accounts as “listening posts”, but others may choose to engage, like @boehringer does in an informal manner. Whatever the case, Twitter is fast becoming the new dominant space for listening and/or engaging the life sciences community.”

Like Shwen, I believe that it a matter of time before pharma and biotech realize that they must embrace social media (in all of its various forms) to remain competitive in today’s increasingly interconnected marketplace.

For those of you who may be interested, you can follow BioJobBlog (@Biojobblog) and Biocrowd (@Biocrowd) on Twitter too!

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Twittering

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Expect More Uneasiness at Pharma Companies This Week

In the wake of last week’s Pfizer-Wyeth M&A feeding frenzy, I suspect that most analysts were hoping that this week would be a little quieter. Unfortunately for many pharmaceutical company employees, this week may be shaping up to be almost as nerve-wracking as last week!and declared that it was on the hunt for a merger or acquisition partner. A ll of the usual suspects have been cited as possibilities. They include: Bristol Myers Squibb (Plavix, Erbitux, Orencia Abilify) , Amgen (EPO, Aranesp, Neupogen, Neulasta and Enbrel), Biogen-Idec (Avonex, Tsyabri and Rituxan) (Actavis (generics) Ratiopharm (generics) and Crucell (vaccines). The hands on favorite and most likely target would be Bristol Myers Squibb because the two companies co-market Plavix, their top selling drug that is due to lose patent protection in the next year or so. That said, in this environment anything can happen. 

 

In other news, GlaxoSmithKline announced that it will be cutting 6,000 jobs later this week when the company puts out financial results. The company began reorganizing itself in 2007 and will continue to do over the next few years to deal with generic encroachment on several of its top selling drugs. Glaxo employs about 100,000 people worldwide. Analysts suspect that many of the job cuts will occur in the UK and that sales rep may be hit the hardest in this latest round of layoffs.

Until next time…

 Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

 

 

Pharma Job Cuts: The Domino Effect

While the domino theory was incorrect when it came to the spread of communism during the Cold War, there may be a kernel of truth to it when it is applied to today’s pharmaceutical industry. On Tuesday, Pfizer announced that it would lay off 800 researchers. Not to be outdone by Pfizer, Roche announced today that it plans to lay off about 780 workers over the next two to three years because of “worsening economic conditions.”

After spending the last decade or so associated with the pharmaceutical industry, one thing that I have learned is that there isn’t a single company that I can think of that wants to be the first to do anything. However, when a pharma company makes a bold move, the others are very quick to follow because they “don’t want to be perceived as not being “cutting edge” or keeping pace with their competitors. To that end, the domino theory may warrant some further investigation when it comes to day-to-day operations of big pharma.

Until next time,

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

 

A "Sea Change at Pharma and Biotech": Recapping the Layoffs

For those of you who haven’t been able to keep up with the latest pharma layoffs, I came across an article in the Philadelphia Business Journal that does an excellent job of recapping all of the major life sciences layoffs that have taken place in the past year or so. The recent massive pharma layoffs prompted William Ashton, Acting Dean of the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia PA to say “I was in the pharmaceutical industry for 28 years. I’ve never seen such a sea change as is occurring right now. This is really dramatic.” Further, Dr. Ashton predicted that drug companies will increase their use of contract sales forces (CSFs) and contract research organizations (CROs) to contain expenses and that staffing firms will be the winners.

This led to me to wonder what Dean Ashton has been doing for the past 10 years or so because the life sciences industry has already increased its reliance on CROs and CSFs. A quick perusal of the pharma and biotech employees who lost their jobs over the past few years reveals that a majority of them were in sales and R&D. I don’t know whether or not I should break the news to Dean Ashton, but the future is already upon us—another example of how out of touch academia is with industry in the 21st century.

I think that it is time for industry executives and academicians to begin a serious dialog to determine the type of training that would be appropriate for individuals seeking jobs in the life sciences industry. A failure to do so will likely have a negative adverse effect on the continued growth and future success of the US life science industry.

Until next time…

 

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Alternate Career Paths: Taking the Road Less Traveled

For the past five years, I have been giving career development seminars that offer graduate students and postdoctoral fellows alternate careers choices (instead of research) for life scientists. The intent of these seminars is to get students who may not be enamored with a possible life long career at the bench (I know that there a lot of you out there) to think about what they really want to do after they complete their graduate or postdoctoral training.

I recently met Jane Chin (on Twitter) who, like me, has had an unorthodox career trajectory for a life scientist. After exchanging several tweets, I learned that we both are microbiologists, Cornell University graduates, entrepreneurs and social media enthusiasts. But, the main reason I am telling you about Jane is that she crafted a fascinating PowerPoint presentation entitled “3 Lessons About Career Life From a Career Nomad” that provides insights into the decisions and choices that she made to shape her current career path. I highly recommend that you take a peek at the presentation—it may help to reduce some future career stress and angst!

Until next time…

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

 

Pfizer: "We Will Be Laying Off Employees But Not Sure When"

Over the past few weeks, the blogosphere was rife with rumors and speculation that Pfizer would be laying off additional R&D personnel in December. However, it seems that the layoffs have been postponed and nobody at Pfizer seems to know when they will take place. Conventional wisdom suggests that job cuts will likely take place sometime after the holidays, probably in mid -January, 09.

Rod MacKenzie, Pfizer’s worldwide head of discovery research told reporters “Given the complexity of the changes within research, I have concluded that we will not be able to provide that clarity [for the layoffs] or communicate them by the end of the year." I suspect that he knows who will be getting pink slips but is reluctant to make the announcement until early next year because it would look awful if Pfizer lets people go right before the holiday season. 

Call me crazy, but I don’t think that publicizing lay offs (to be determined later) is good for employee productivity and morale. I have no doubt that rumors about the impending layoffs have been circulating at Pfizer for months. Unfortunately for Pfizer, one or more of its employees leaked the information and company executives are in damage control and spin modes. The inability of Pfizer executives to control internal information flow is just another example of why many industry analysts believe that Pfizer grew too quickly over the past decade. Nevertheless, hundreds and perhaps thousands of Pfizer employees will lose their jobs in the not so distant future.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (forget Groton, CT)

 

Pharmaceutical Industry is Losing its Reputation As an Ethical Industry

According to a recent analysis conducted by Covalence a Geneva Switzerland-based organization that tracks the ethical reputation of multinationals, the pharmaceutical industry’s ethical reputation dropped from first to third on Covalence’s all-time EthicalQuote ranking that monitors 10 industries. Further, over the past year, pharma has only managed to achieve an overall ranking of 8th on the list.

The reasons given for the ongoing decline are increased attention on product risk and decreasing media coverage of donations and philanthropy of pharmaceutical companies. The recent high profile coverage of the safety risks associated GlaxoSmithKline’s Paxil and Merck’s Vioxx are good examples of why the ethical image of pharma continues on its downward spiral.

To improve their image, ethicists recommend that drug companies showcase innovative drugs in poor countries, reduce prices to increase access to drugs and loosen intellectual property rights so that there is global access to potentially life-saving drugs. While several companies like Merck and Roche have gone down this path, it may be too little too late.

Until next time…

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

 

Looking to Improve Your Business Acumen?--A New Mini-MBA for Biotech

I am frequently asked by life sciences PhDs whether an MBA would improve their chances of finding a job in industry. And, my response is always “maybe— because it depends. I don’t think that getting a traditional MBA really gives you that much of an edge especially if you are an established PhD looking for career advancement or change.  However, if you are a graduate student or postdoc who has already decided that academia is not for you, then getting a certificate or M.S. through an established graduate program in biotechnology (Georgetown University’s M.S. in biotechnology or The New York Center for Biotechnology's  Fundamentals of Bioscience Program) may increase the likelihood of winning a job in industry. This is because hiring managers recognize that in addition to a job candidate’s technical competency, they possess an understanding of the business aspects of the industry—something that is vital for scientists to be successful in the biotech biz.

Recognizing this, Rutgers University recently created a program that they call ‘a mini-MBA for the biopharmaceutical industry’. In contrast with traditional MBA or M.S. programs, the mini-MBA is a 12 week long, degree-granting program that was designed to familiarize students with the nuances and intricacies of the business aspects of the biopharmaceutical program. The good news is that they are actively recruiting students to fill the slots available in their inaugural class. The bad news is that it costs $4,995 to enroll. That said, it may be worth the time to check it out because—in the end—the investment may be worth it!

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

US Pharma Jobs: Some Good and Bad News

Let me begin with the good news. The Indianapolis Business journal reported today that Schwarz Pharma Manufacturing, Inc is planning a $12 million expansion of its Seymour, Indiana manufacturing plant and distribution center. When completed the expansion is expected to increase the company's employment in the southern Indiana city from 366 to 516 by 2011. The drug maker-a unit of Schwarz Pharma AG of Monheim, Germany-said it plans to begin hiring managers, business associates and production staff later this month.

And now, the bad news. The Pharmalot Blog reported today that the New Jersey-based generic manufacturer Par Pharmaceuticals is eliminating 26 percent of its workforce expected to save from $45 million to $55 million a year. Jobs will be lost in manufacturing, research and development, and other departments. How much more downsizing and job elimination can New Jersey take before it goes bankrupt? Maybe Icelanders can shed some light on that?

Until next time….

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

More "Belt-Tightening" at Bristol-Myers Squibb

A little over a year ago, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) launched its “productivity transformation initiative” (PTI) designed to “transform” the company into a next generation biopharma leader. As most of you may already know, PTI is corporate speak for layoffs and downsizing.

The PTI was largely in response to impending loss of patent protection in 2011 of its blockbuster Plavix, an anti-thrombosis drug that BMS co-markets with Sanofi Aventis. While BMS has a deep and innovative drug pipeline, the likelihood that the company will be able to replace Plavix revenues with one of its investigational drugs is remote.

To make matters worse, late last week, one of Plavix’s likely successors, an investigational anti-clotting drug called apixaban (being co-developed with Pfizer) failed to meet its primary clinical endpoints in a pivotal Phase III clinical trial called Advance 1 which was designed to evaluate the drug for prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing total knee replacement.  The 3,195-patient study compared apixaban, an oral Factor Xa inhibitor given at a dose of 2.5 mg, twice daily, to twice-daily 30mg injections of Sanofi-Aventis’ Lovenox (enoxaparin). This late stage clinical failure prompted the company to announce that it would no longer seek approval of apixaban in 2009 as previously planned.

Early this week, BMS ratcheted up the PTI and imposed a total hiring freeze for all permanent employees, consultants and leased workers (contractors). Previously, vacated permanent or temporary positions could be refilled if appropriate, qualified job candidates were identified. Finally, the company announced today that it would permanently ground its corporate fleet of jets that was operating out of Mercer County Airport in Trenton, NJ. According to an article in my local paper, the Trenton Times, BMS plans to sell four aircraft and layoff about 32 employees, mostly pilots and mechanics. 

Despite all of the other PTI initiatives implemented to date, the decision to sell all of its corporate jets sends a clear signal to stakeholders that BMS truly “means business”! I guess Jim Cornelius and other BMS executives will have to book commercial flights or take Amtrak to out-of-town meetings for the foreseeable future. That said, I doubt that Jim and others will be driving or taking the train to meetings in New York City or Washington—the corporate helicopter fleet is still operating!!!!!

Until next time….

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (forget BMS)!!!!!!!

It Had to Happen Sooner or Later--Pharma Has Discovered YouTube

First, King Pharmaceuticals posted a non-branded high blood pressure video on YouTube in early 2007. Next, Novartis added a 60-second commercial (as part of its Fluflix campaign) asking people to submit videos about what it's like to have the flu. Earlier this year, Insmed upped the ante by posting a video lobbying for new legislation for the approval of follow-on biologics in the US. However, these pharma assaults on YouTube pale in comparison to the launch of Johnson & Johnson’s health channel on YouTube earlier this week.

The channel currently showcases a small selection of health information videos created by NBC News chief medical editor Nancy Snyderman while she worked J&J. Video sites, like YouTube and Vimeo, offer pharma companies a place to feature expensive off media advertising assets (that are currently collecting dust) and to post ads for new drugs and products that are ready for launch.  J &J is the first pharma company to recognize that it can leverage the current social media craze to increase its visibility, sell more drugs and bolster its stock price!

While companies could host videos on their own websites,YouTube’s massive traffic of more than 80 million users offers companies a much larger and diverse audience. And unlike blogs or forums, pharma companies have complete control over the content of the videos that they post on video websites. Moreover, they don't have to worry about negative comments being left after a post (YouTube comments can be turned off), and they can brand and edit video content to target a particular demographic or audience. Finally, videos can be changed or removed by companies as needed.

The bad news is, that like all other forms of media on the Internet, there are currently no regulations for videos posted by pharma companies on video websites sites like YouTube. In other words, pharma companies can do or say whatever they want in the videos that they post—never a good thing! I suspect that at some point FDA will draft a guidance document or two on the topic. But pharma companies need not worry, it will likely be many years before the agency divines regulations guiding the messaging and content of online pharmaceutical videos.

The appearance of pharma videos on YouTube, and the growing number of pharma profiles on social networking sites indicates that pharma is ready to embrace social media as the next best thing since DTC advertising. I was wondering what took them so long?

I hope that J&J doesn’t start following me on Twitter!

Hat tip to Eye on FDA for the story!

Until next time,

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

More Interviewing Tips

I happened upon this article that expands upon some of the interviewing ideas and tips that I presented in previous posts. The piece was written by someone from Business Week so it must relevant and might even be worth reading! 

Until next time….

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

What to Look For in a "Bad" CEO

According to Terry Leap, a Professor of Management at Clemson University, CEOs that exhibit some or all of the following traits or behaviors are likely to be problems.

  • An obsession with acquiring prestige, power and wealth
  • A reputation for unwarranted and shameless self promotion
  • A tendency to propose “grandiose strategies” and failing to include a detailed plan to carry them out.
  • A superb ability to compartmentalize and rationalize things.
  • A history of emphasizing activity, like hours worked or meetings attended, over accomplishment.
  • A reputation for implementing major strategic changes unilaterally or for forcing programs down the throats of reluctant managers.
  • An impulsive, flippant decision–making style.
  • A love of monologues coupled with poor listening skills.
  • A tendency to display contempt for the ideas of others.
  • A penchant for inconsiderate acts

The thing that worries me is that many academicians and most CEOs that I know exhibit five or more of these traits. Oy! 

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

Just As I Suspected!!!!

I want to thank Ed Silverman over at Pharmalot for providing me with data to back up my suspicions that hiring is taking a downturn at most pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices companies.

According to the post at Pharmalot “Employers and recruiters in pharma, health care and biotech performed fewer searches in October, mostly thanks to declines in two key states - New Jersey and Massachusetts, which dropped by 5.6 and 3.2 percent, respectively, according to stats from MedZilla.com. Of the top jobs posted, the biggest changes were in research (a loss of two percent) and gains of 1.8 to 2.3 percent in business development, primary care, and marketing. Applicants, meanwhile, continued at the previous month’s rate of job searching, with only California seeing a change of more than one percent in either direction.”

Sales jobs are also taking a big hit.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but sometimes a reality check is necessary to maintain perspective.

Keep the faith!

Until next time…

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

Pharmalot