Xanomeline Tartrate/Trospium Chloride

iStock, NWM Drug candidates don’t usually move among Big Pharma, but these five biotechs helped facilitate such hand-offs, scooping up assets from one pharma on the cheap before being bought out for billions by another. In the drugmaking game, there’s very little that companies won’t do to keep their pipelines healthy. But there’s one kind of deal that’s pretty much verboten in the industry: a direct Big Pharma–to–Big Pharma transfer of assets. That is, unless you have a biotech intermediary. Big companies certainly can work together—see Regeneron and Sanofi’s blockbuster Dupixent franchise that stems from a 2007 research agreement. But the way that assets typically get swapped between big companies is via a smaller biotech. In these cases, a small company picks up assets from a Big Pharma. They could be from the storeroom, unlikely to ever be developed until a group of scientists and investors come along with an idea—much like Ensho Therapeutics that nabbed treatments from Japan’s Eisai. Or like SpringWorks Therapeutics , which had backing within Pfizer to spin out the assets to form a singular rare disease biotech. This is typically a smart beginning for a company. Often, the Big Pharma will have already done some initial safety testing allowing a more advanced clinical start than with a fresh, preclinical asset. The biotech then does some legwork proving out the asset and, if all goes well, the company gets acquired, often by a Big Pharma and usually for a hefty sum. Here, BioSpace looks at five such cases, tracing how these assets made it from one Big Pharma to another, typically through a hefty acquisition, and charting how these products may fare under their new owners. BioSpace Captyla Becomes a Market Force Pharmas involved: BMS ⇒ J&J Biotech intermediary: Intra-Cellular Therapies Sale prices: Up to $16 million ⇒ $14.6 billion Aside from being the largest M&A deal this year so far, Johnson & Johnson’s $14.6 billion acquisition of Intra-Cellular Therapies in January is also a great example of how assets can pass from pharma to pharma. More than 20 years ago, on May 31, 2005, Bristol Myers Squibb handed off a clutch of assets to Intra-Cellular in exchange for a $1 million upfront payment, plus milestones that could reach up to $14.8 million. Among these assets was a molecule called ITI-007, an orally available atypical antipsychotic drug that the biotech at the time planned to develop for schizophrenia and other disorders of the central nervous system. This deal would eventually pay off massively for Intra-Cellular. In late 2013, ITI-007 notched a mid-stage win , significantly improving both positive and negative symptoms in patients with acutely exacerbated schizophrenia. The drug, also called lumateperone, sustained its clinical benefit through Phase III. These findings would ultimately carry lumateperone to an FDA approval in December 2019 for schizophrenia, to be marketed as Caplyta. The drug won another approval nearly two years later, this time for bipolar depression in adults. With two neuropsychiatric conditions, Caplyta became a market force for Intra-Cellular, bringing in $680.5 million in 2024 for 47% year-on-year growth. Caplyta was the centerpiece of the acquisition in January this year, with J&J noting the drug’s potential expansion into major depressive disorder (MDD). In December 2024, Intra-Cellular filed a supplemental application for the drug in this indication, backed by Phase III data showing that Caplyta, when combined with an antidepressant, significantly eases symptoms versus placebo. If approved, Caplyta could access a market worth over $1 billion. Pfizer Hands Over Afimkibart for the Vant Life Pharmas involved: Pfizer ⇒ Roche Biotech intermediary: Telavant Sale prices: Unknown ⇒ $7.1 billion For a company like Roivant—the entire model of which involves forming a spinout company around a molecule to take forward—passing assets on to Big Pharma is par for the course. Such is the case for gastro-focused Telavant, which launched in late 2022 in partnership with Pfizer. The drug at the heart of Telavant came from the Big Pharma: the monoclonal antibody PF-06480605, which is designed to target TL1A , a cytokine that plays a role in the inflammatory signaling cascade. Under the Televant fold, the drug candidate was given the name RVT-3101. The pickup quickly proved its worth to Roivant. In June 2023, the biotech touted a 29% clinical remission rate at 14 weeks , which further improved to 36% at 56 weeks, pointing to RVT-3101’s long-term efficacy. At the 56-week follow-up, 50% of patients on Telavant’s antibody also saw endoscopic improvement, while 21% achieved endoscopic remission. Mergers & acquisitions Q3 Saw Some of the Highest-Value Biopharma Acquisitions of the Year So Far J&J still holds the top deal of the year by value with its $14.6 billion buy of Intra-Cellular in January, but the next four biggest acquisitions came in the past four months. October 1, 2025 · 2 min read · Annalee Armstrong Read More A month later, Telavant launched a Phase II study for RVT-3101 in moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease, another type of inflammatory bowel condition. In October 2023, Roche put down $7.1 billion to buy it all. Pfizer retains RVT-3101 rights outside of the U.S. and Japan. As part of its Telavant takeover, Roche obtained Pfizer’s 25% stake in the spinout. Since the acquisition, RVT-3101 has been renamed afimkibart and advanced into late-stage development for ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, according to Roche’s half-year 2025 report . The pharma expects to submit an approval application for the former indication in 2027 and the latter as early as 2028. Karuna Dusts Off Lilly’s Xanomeline Pharmas involved: Lilly ⇒ BMS Biotech intermediary: Karuna Sale prices: $100,000 ⇒ $14 billion After handing off a schizophrenia asset to J&J, BMS in December 2023 paid $14 billion to get back into the indication, acquiring Karuna Therapeutics and its muscarinic antipsychotic drug. The drug would go on to win the FDA’s approval in September 2024 under the brand name Cobenfy, unlocking the first new treatment mechanism for schizophrenia in more than three decades. Cobenfy’s origins stretch back many years—and to the shelves of another Big Pharma company. Xanomeline, the active ingredient in Cobenfy, was first fashioned as a therapy for Alzheimer’s disease under Eli Lilly. Steven Paul, who was in charge of xanomeline’s studies at Lilly, told BioSpace in an October interview that it was xanomeline’s action on acetylcholine that made it an attractive intervention for a disease characterized by the loss of neurons. “If we could stimulate the receptors for acetylcholine, maybe in the absence of those neurons we could still enhance memory and learning,” Paul explained. Safety issues proved to be a deal-breaker for Lilly, however, with xanomeline often triggering nausea and vomiting. A breakthrough for xanomeline came with Karuna, which posited that combining it with a muscarinic agonist could counter the toxicity issues. In 2018, the biotech raised $42 million in a series A to test the theory. The new combined drug was dubbed KarXT, and from there, things moved quickly: an $80 million series B in April 2019 followed by an IPO a few months later . BMS was eager to pick up the late-stage asset and offered to buy Karuna in December 2023, shepherding the drug to approval. .responsive-container { display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap; border: 1px solid #ededed; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, Sans-Serif; padding: 20px 20px 10px 20px; } .column-left { flex: 1; max-width: 45%; padding: 20px 20px 10px 20px; } .column-right { flex: 2; padding: 20px 20px 10px 20px; } @media (max-width: 768px) { .column-left, .column-right { max-width: 100%; flex: 100%; padding: 10px 0; } } Subscribe to BioPharm Executive! Market insights, trending business and policy stories for biopharma leaders hbspt.forms.create({ region: "na1", portalId: "4413123", formId: "7c139b3c-ff0b-44e0-bffe-f449801dca59", onFormSubmitted: function($form, data) { window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; window.dataLayer.push({ 'event': 'GTMevent', 'event_name': 'newsletter_sign_up' }); } }); Sine then, however, Cobenfy has struggled in the clinic, with data from the Phase III ARISE study in April 2025 showing that using the drug alongside atypical antipsychotics did not significantly improve symptom burden in patients with schizophrenia as compared with placebo. In a note at the time, Leerink Partners said that the failure indicates that Cobenfy may have “far less potential than we originally anticipated.” During BMS’ Q2 earnings call in July, Chief Medical Officer Samit Hirawat said that the pharma has yet to meet with the FDA to discuss ARISE’s findings and Cobenfy’s future. Akero Runs With Amgen’s Efruxifermin  Pharmas involved: Amgen ⇒ Novo Nordisk Biotech intermediary: Akero Sale prices: $121,353 ⇒ $5.2 billion In January this year, Akero Therapeutics’ investigational FGF21 analog efruxifermin elicited a 24% reduction in liver fibrosis versus placebo in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) in January. The results were so good, they attracted the attention of one Big Pharma suitor and sent another looking for a potential competitor . Novo Nordisk in October took the plunge and acquired Akero for $54 per share, a purchase price that amounted to a 19% premium to the biotech’s average share price over the prior 30 days. All told, Novo put $5.2 billion on the line for the takeover. Unsurprisingly, the star of the buyout was efruxifermin, which analysts at BMO Capital Markets said in an Oct. 9 note is a “clean pipeline fit” for the Danish giant. Mergers & acquisitions The Top Big Pharmas Have $1.2T in Stretch M&A Firepower Available The two most historically deal-conservative Big Pharmas have the most money to play with for a major M&A transaction, according to a recent Stifel analysis. October 1, 2025 · 6 min read · Annalee Armstrong Read More But efruxifermin’s origins are humble, being punted from Amgen’s portfolio and handed off to Akero in June 2018 . The drug’s development was funded with just $65 million in series A money raised in June 2018 —which very quickly paid off for investors. In March 2020, the drug, then known as AKR-001, aced a Phase IIa study , showing significant reductions in liver fat and liver enzymes versus placebo. Not all has been easy for efruxifermin, however, with the candidate in October 2023 failing to significantly cut liver fibrosis in the Phase IIb SYMMETRY study, triggering a massive investor selloff. But Akero stuck with the FGF21 analog and in March 2024 bounced back with Phase IIb data from a study called HARMONY showing at least a one stage improvement in liver fibrosis in 75% of treated patients, versus only 24% in placebo comparators. With efruxifermin in its pocket, Novo now hopes to reach some of the 22 million patients with MASH in the U.S. alone. By some estimates, the market could hit $16 billion worldwide by 2033 . Boston Pharma Takes Efimosfermin to Best-In-Class Pharmas involved: Novartis ⇒ GSK Biotech intermediary: Boston Pharma Sale prices: Unknown ⇒ $1.2 billion Also looking to play in the MASH arena is GSK, which in May this year paid $1.2 billion upfront to buy Boston Pharmaceuticals’ efimosfermin—a former Novartis asset. An FGF21 analog like efruxifermin, efimosfermin came to Boston Pharma in September 2020 from Novartis for an undisclosed payment. In the years that followed, Boston Pharma ushered the drug, called BOS-580, through clinical development. In June 2023, the company announced that the molecule significantly lowered liver fat content in a Phase IIa MASH study, while also addressing key biomarkers of liver injury and fibrosis. Follow-on mid-stage data in November 2024 demonstrated that more than 45% of patients treated with efimosfermin saw at least a one-stage improvement in fibrosis without MASH worsening, as opposed to only 20.6% of those who received a placebo. Meanwhile, 38.7% of treated patients achieved fibrosis improvement and MASH resolution, versus 17.6% in placebo. GSK touted efimosfermin’s “best-in-class” potential for MASH when announcing its purchase of the asset from Boston, noting that it is ripe for Phase III development. C-suite Sophie Kornowski: From Medicine Taste-Tester to Data-Driven Dealmaker What will Boston Pharmaceuticals CEO Sophie Kornowski do now that the company is selling off its pipeline and winding down operations? Whatever it is, data will take her there. July 22, 2025 · 5 min read · Annalee Armstrong Read More Aside from testing the drug as a monotherapy, GSK also plans to combine it with an in-house MASH asset called GSK’990, a siRNA therapy that is currently in mid-stage development. GSK also has ambitions to push efimosfermin beyond MASH, particularly into alcohol-related liver disease. Exact plans for efimosfermin remain murky, however, with the pharma only revealing in its Q2 presentation that it expects a MASH launch in 2029 .

在创新为王、竞争白热化的全球制药界，巨头们的高位从来不是偶然。 面对动辄数十亿美元的研发投入与莫测的临床试验结果，真正的制胜之道，往往在于将资源集中于最锋利的“矛尖”上。 这不仅仅是药品管线的竞争，更是战略眼光与核心优势的终极比拼。 那么，当我们将目光投向全球前十的制药霸主时会发现：没有一家公司是“全能王”，它们的成功，恰恰源于在特定领域构建起难以撼动的护城河。  无论是辉瑞凭借新冠疫苗与口服药在公共卫生事件中实现的惊人跨越，还是礼来与诺和诺德凭借GLP-1药物在代谢领域掀起的全球风暴，都印证了“杀手锏”的战略价值。 接下来，我们将一同揭秘这份顶尖药企的“武功秘籍”，看它们如何凭借各自的看家本领，在全球数十万亿美元的健康市场中，占据属于自己的一方天下。 纵观这十家巨头，它们的战略路径清晰地分化为几种模式： 重磅药物驱动型：如礼来、默沙东，凭借一两款“现象级”产品实现高速增长。 核心堡垒防御型：如罗氏在如肿瘤、艾伯维在免疫这些传统优势领域建立极高占比。 战略转型阵痛型：如辉瑞、BMS，正处于专利悬崖、业务剥离或管线重塑的关键调整期。 以下为具体分析。如无特别说明，下文中的财务数据均指2025年前9个月综合数据。 1 礼来：现象级单品的胜利 礼来是当前“重磅炸弹”模式最极致的代表。替尔泊肽这一款药物，不仅贡献了超过一半的营收，更以高增速驱动公司高速前进。其战略核心高度集中于代谢领域，而肿瘤等业务虽稳健，但已成为“明星旁边的陪衬”。 礼来制药主要分为四大业务板块——心血管代谢健康、肿瘤、免疫、神经科学。 心血管代谢健康业务（占比74%）：337亿美元（+65%），主要受益于替尔泊肽的强劲势头——降糖版Mounjaro和减重版Zepbound合计营收248亿美元，占据总营收的54%。 肿瘤业务（占比15%）：68亿美元（+9%）。乳腺癌药物CKD4/6抑制剂Verzenio是该板块的支柱，营收41亿美元，同比+10%，在总营收中占比9%。 免疫业务（占比8%）：37亿美元（+19%）。IL-17A单抗抗炎药Taltz营收25亿美元，同比+9%。 神经科学业务（占比2%）：9亿美元（-14%）。是礼来四大业务中唯一下滑业务，但由于体量不大，对整体也完成表现影响不大。 2 辉瑞：后新冠时代的艰难转型 辉瑞正处在后新冠时代的艰难转型期。其“瘦身”与“增肌”并举：一方面果断终止11个管线，为未来“减肥”；另一方面通过交易积极加码免疫肿瘤和当下最火的减重领域，试图抓住下一波增长浪潮。其核心板块增速放缓，凸显了寻找新增长引擎的紧迫性。 对于目前已有业务，辉瑞分为三大板块： 生物制药（Biopharma）：这是辉瑞的核心板块，占据总营收的98%； Centreone：辉瑞内部的专业合同开发及生产组织，即CDMO； Ignite：辉瑞推出的创新合作计划，旨在与生物科技公司等创新企业合作，加速其突破性疗法的开发和商业化进程。 生物制药（Biopharma）分为基础护理、专业护理、肿瘤三部分。 基础护理（Primary Care，占比42%）：188.82亿美（-11%），主要产品包括抗凝药物Eliquis、新一代偏头痛药物Nurtec ODT、新冠相关产品（含药物Paxlovid和疫苗Comimaty）以及其他疫苗（包括肺炎球菌疫苗Prevnar family、呼吸道合胞病毒疫苗Abrysvo）。 专业护理（Specialty Care，占比28%）：127.75亿美元（+5%），主要是受支柱产品——心血管罕见病创新药Vyndaqel family增长所驱动。 肿瘤（Oncology，占比27%）：123.99亿美元（+7%），是辉瑞生物制药板块增速最高的细分领域。在乳腺癌（核心产品Ibrance）、前列腺癌（核心产品Xtandi）、白血病（核心产品Padcev）、肺癌（组合疗法Braftovi+Mektovi）影响力强。 3 强生创新制药：多元壁垒构筑稳健巨轮 强生的战略核心在于利用多元化的产品矩阵构筑深厚的护城河。它并没有特别依赖某一款产品，而是通过在肿瘤、免疫、神经科学等多个领域拥有的多款重磅药物，保证了公司在部分产品下滑时仍能保持整体增长。 强生创新制药业务分为肿瘤、自身免疫、神经科学、肺动脉高压、感染、心血管/代谢/其他六大板块。 肿瘤（占比创新制药板块41%，下同）：185.19亿美元（+21.2%）； 自身免疫（占比27%）：118.68亿美元（-12.7%）； 神经科学（占比13%）：57.22亿美元（+7.2%）； 肺动脉高压（占比7%）：32.53亿美元（+2.0%）； 心血管/代谢/其他（占比6%）：28.42亿美元（+9.1%）。 感染（占比5%）：24.34亿美元（-7.2%）。 4 艾伯维：成功穿越“专利悬崖”的范本 艾伯维上演了一场成功应对“专利悬崖” 的经典案例。在“药王”修美乐销售额大幅下滑后，公司迅速完成了增长动力的切换，Skyrizi和Rinvoq两款新一代产品强势接棒，成为新的业绩支柱。这证明了其卓越的产品迭代能力和战略执行力。 艾伯维业务板块分为免疫、神经科学、肿瘤、美学、眼科、其他关键产品六大板块。 免疫（占比49%）： 217.80亿美元（+12.3%）； 神经科学（占比18%）：78.06亿美元（+20.3%）； 肿瘤（占比11%）：49.91亿美元（+2.6%）； 美学（占比8%）：35.74亿美元（-7.8%）； 眼科（占比3%）：15.29亿美元（-4.2%）； 其他关键产品（占比6%）：28.52亿美元（+4.3%）。 5 默沙东：“王牌”依赖下的增长隐忧 默沙东肿瘤业务在制药中的占比高达60%，“K药”一款产品就贡献了超过一半的营收。尽管K药仍在增长，但疫苗等业务的波动暴露了其对单一产品过度依赖的风险。公司正通过成本控制和寻求并购来为“后K药时代”布局 默沙东制药业务分为肿瘤、疫苗、医院急症护理、心血管、病毒学、神经科学、糖尿病、其他制药8个板块。 肿瘤（占制药业务60%，下同）：260.03亿美元（+10%）； 疫苗（占比18%）：78.77亿美元（-24%）； 医院急症护理（占比6%）：24.91亿美元（+7%）； 心血管（占比%）：15.54亿美元（+109%）； 病毒学（占比2%）：9.37亿美元（-35%）； 神经科学（占比0%）：1.37亿美元（-23%）； 糖尿病（占比5%）：20.43亿美元（+15%）； 其他制药（占比5%）：22.68亿美元（+20%）。 需要注意的是，相较于2024年拥有9个细分板块，默沙东制药在2025年免疫板块收入为0，原因在于该板块拥有的2款产品——Simponi（戈利木单抗）和Remicade（英夫利西单抗）——原本由默沙东与强生合作开发，根据合作协议，默沙东已于2025年将Simponi和Remicade在中国及全球市场的商业化权益交还给强生，相应收入归零。 6 阿斯利康：多领域均衡发展 阿斯利康展现了朝气蓬勃的增长势头，其战略路径是典型的多领域均衡发展。公司在肿瘤、CVRM（心血管、肾脏及代谢）、呼吸与免疫和罕见病等多个板块都建立了强大且增长稳健的业务。 阿斯利康将业务分为肿瘤、CVRM（心血管、肾脏及代谢疾病）、呼吸与免疫（R&I）、疫苗与免疫疗法（V&I）、罕见病五大板块。 肿瘤（占比43%）：185.90亿美元（+16%），阿斯利康的第一大业务板块； CVRM（占比23%）：98.09亿美元（+5%）； R&I（占比15%）：64.93亿美元（+13%）； V&I（占比2%）：8.26亿美元（+2%）； 罕见病（占比16%）：67.52亿美元（+6%）。 7 罗氏制药：摆脱对肿瘤的单一依赖 罗氏正在摆脱对肿瘤业务的单一依赖，在神经、免疫、眼科领域构建了健康的增长梯队。但另一方面，其缺乏一个能比肩礼来GLP-1或诺和诺德GLP-1的“现象级”爆发点。重点押注CVRM领域，不仅是一次进攻，更是一次关乎未来十年地位的关键防御。 罗氏的制药业务分为肿瘤/血液学、神经学、免疫、眼科、其他药物五个板块。 肿瘤/血液学（占比51%）：180亿瑞郎（+7%）； 神经学（占比21%）：73亿瑞郎（+9%）； 免疫（占比14%）：50亿瑞郎（+15%）； 眼科（占比9%）：32亿瑞郎（+11%）； 其他药物（占比6%）：21亿瑞郎。 此外，罗氏在财报中特别强调了其心血管/肾脏/代谢（CVRM）管线的未来潜力（如下图）。 8 诺华：“多引擎驱动”高质量增长 诺华展现了 “多引擎驱动”的高质量增长模式。其五大业务板块中，四大核心板块均实现双位数增长，尤其是神经科学（+26%）和肿瘤（+20%）增速亮眼。 诺华业务分为心血管/肾脏/代谢、免疫、神经科学、肿瘤、成熟品牌五大板块。 肿瘤（占比31%）：125.74亿美元（+20%）； 免疫（占比18%）：75.69亿美元（+10%）； 血管/肾脏/代谢（占比18%）：73.58亿美元（+19%）； 神经科学（占比11%）：43.68亿美元（+26%）； 成熟品牌（占比23%）：93.27亿美元（-8%）。 9 赛诺菲：优势领域坚实 赛诺菲呈现出一种 “双轮驱动”的稳健但略显保守的业务格局。其核心由免疫学（达必妥所在的板块）与疫苗两大传统优势构成坚实基本盘。然而，其在肿瘤、神经科学等前沿领域的布局严重缺失（合计仅占3%），这既是其业务风险所在，也揭示了其未来增长亟需突破的瓶颈。 赛诺菲业务分为免疫、疫苗、罕见病、肿瘤、神经学、其他核心药物六个板块。 免疫（占比37%）：118.44亿欧元； 疫苗（占比18%）：58.97亿欧元； 罕见病（占比15%）：47.83亿欧元； 肿瘤（占比2%）：6.34亿欧元； 神经学（占比1%）：1.87亿欧元）； 其他核心药物（占比27%）：88.47亿欧元。 10 百时美施贵宝：新旧动能转换关键期 百时美施贵宝正处在新旧动能转换的关键期，其战略核心是凭借“增长产品组合”与“前沿管线布局”穿越转型阵痛。 财务上，百时美施贵宝把产品划分为增长产品（Growth Products）和成熟产品（Legacy Products）。 增长产品（占比53%）：190.16亿美元（+17%），主要由Opdivo、Breyanzi、Reblozyl 、Camzyos、Krazati和Cobenfy等产品强势驱动。 成熟产品（占比47%）：166.76亿美元（-16%）。 细分领域上，百时美施贵宝主要分为肿瘤、心血管、血液学、免疫、神经科学五大板块。 肿瘤（占比30%）：105亿美元； 心血管（占比33%）：109.91亿美元； 血液学（占比22%）：77.56亿美元； 免疫（占比8%）：29.03亿美元。 神经科学（占比1%）：5.23亿美元。 细分领域数据按照财务PPT展示的领域内产品估算，仅供参考。 通览这十家顶尖药企的业绩图景，我们可以清晰地看到几条共同的制胜法则： “王牌单品”的威力空前：如礼来的替尔泊肽、默沙东的Keytruda，一款超级药物足以改变公司乃至行业的格局。 肿瘤领域仍是“必争之地”：多数巨头均将其作为核心或重要增长极，竞争白热化。 “减重”和“免疫”是未来战场：从辉瑞、礼来等的布局可以看出，下一轮竞赛已经开启。 战略聚焦优于大而全：无论是通过并购“补强”，还是果断“舍弃”非核心资产，巨头们都在让自己的战略重心更加清晰和锐利。 未来的制药之王，必将属于那些既能精准押注未来科技，又能高效执行战略的公司。 · END · 点亮“”，分享热点👇