Gene Therapy Deal-Making Trends, 2012–17
Gene Therapy Deal-Making Trends, 2012–17
$2,995.00
A robust deal-making market has enabled gene therapy drug development to be advanced and adequately funded through alliances and financings, and in many cases has provided exits for investors through acquisitions.
Publisher: Datamonitor Healthcare
- Description
- Contents
- Samples
A robust deal-making market has enabled gene therapy drug development to be advanced and adequately funded through alliances and financings, and in many cases has provided exits for investors through acquisitions. The volume of deals in each of these transaction types has experienced some fluctuation during 2012–17, but generally is on an upward trend as companies aim to capitalize on a market that has been reinvigorated with the strong scientific and commercial argument for cell and gene therapies, particularly chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies.
Among acquisitions, there was virtually an even split between targets focused on in vivo gene therapies, or “gene” therapies, and those concentrating on ex vivo “cell and gene” therapies. However, large pharmaceutical buyers were more likely to acquire in vivo therapy developers, reflective more of the disease focus of the target company rather than the overall gene therapy development strategies of the acquirers. Alliances, too, did not show a preference for one approach over the other, but gene therapy companies were more active in aggregate financing than cell and gene therapy players, possibly an effect of the emergence only within the last few years of start-ups founded around CAR-T and other cell and gene therapies.
The broad field of gene therapy may be broken down into two main categories: gene therapy, which mainly involves the in vivo administration of genes, packaged into viral or non-viral vectors, directly into cells inside of the body; or cell and gene therapy, which comprises the ex vivo genetic modification of cells. Certain datasets within the report are split in this manner.
The sources of the deals data throughout the report are Informa’s Medtrack and Strategic Transactions.
CONTENTS
6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
8 GENE THERAPY DEAL-MAKING ACROSS THE INDUSTRY
8 Deal volume is generally increasing, supported by alliances
9 Outlier transactions, especially in acquisitions, have contributed to peaks in gene therapy values in certain years
12 GENE THERAPY ACQUISITIONS
12 There has been a steady increase in the volume of gene therapy acquisitions
12 Acquisitions have reached multibillion-dollar values, thanks to outlier transactions
17 Both gene therapies, and cell and gene therapies, are the subjects of acquisitions
19 Besides oncology, another active therapy area target in acquisitions is blood diseases
20 Bibliography
22 GENE THERAPY ALLIANCES
22 Aggregate value for alliances has reached $30bn
23 As time goes on, upfront payments represent a lower proportion of total deal value
25 The top 10 deals captured a large part of the total value
29 Over time, cell and gene therapies have become more of a focus in partnerships
30 Oncology gene therapies are subject of the most alliances
34 Bellicum, a CAR-T developer, is the most active gene therapy in-licenser
36 Bibliography
37 GENE THERAPY FINANCINGS
37 Companies working in gene therapy have raised $14bn through various financing types
40 Gene therapy developers were more active in financing
43 Cell and gene therapy companies lead the top 10 grossing IPOs
48 Gene editing was well represented in top 10 gene therapy venture rounds
52 Bibliography
53 DEAL-MAKING CASE STUDIES IN GENE THERAPY
53 Pfizer commits to gene therapy with Bamboo Therapeutics
54 CAR-T is worth billions to Gilead
56 Biogen and the University of Pennsylvania form a lucrative industry/academic partnership
58 Vertex turns to gene editing as another way to extend its cystic fibrosis franchise
59 Bibliography
61 APPENDIX
61 Scope
61 Methodology
LIST OF FIGURES
8 Figure 1: Gene therapy deals by volume and deal type, 2012–17
9 Figure 2: Most gene therapy deal activity is through partnerships: proportion of gene therapy deal volume by deal type, 2012–17*
10 Figure 3: Gene therapy deals by value and deal type, 2012–17
11 Figure 4: Acquisitions in gene therapy represent the largest value: proportion of gene therapy deal value by deal type, 2012–17
12 Figure 5: Gene therapy acquisition volume and value, 2012–17*
18 Figure 6: Gene therapy acquisition volume by category, 2012–17*
19 Figure 7: Gene therapy acquisition volume proportion by gene therapy category, 2012–17*
20 Figure 8: Gene therapy acquisition volume by therapy area, 2012–17*
23 Figure 9: Gene therapy alliances volume and value, 2012–17*
24 Figure 10: Upfront payments are decreasing as a proportion of total value in gene therapy deals, 2012–17*
25 Figure 11: Upfront and total value averages on gene therapy deals, 2012–17*
29 Figure 12: Gene therapy alliances volume by category, 2012–17*
30 Figure 13: Cell and gene therapies are taking a greater share of alliances, 2012–17*
31 Figure 14: Gene therapy alliances volume by therapy area, 2012–17*
32 Figure 15: Annual gene therapy alliances volume by therapy area, 2012–17*
33 Figure 16: Gene therapy deals by therapy area and category, 2012–17*
34 Figure 17: Cell and gene therapies in oncology: alliances volume and value, 2012–17*
35 Figure 18: Leading companies in gene therapy in-licensing, 2012–17*
36 Figure 19: Big Pharma and Mid Pharma gene therapy in-licensing volume by category, 2012–17*
37 Figure 20: Gene therapy financings by volume, 2012–17*
38 Figure 21: Gene therapy financings by value, 2012–17*
39 Figure 22: Public offerings represent a smaller share in volume, but dominate the value in gene therapy, 2012–17*
40 Figure 23: Gene therapy average per financing values, 2012–17*
41 Figure 24: Gene therapy financing volume by category, 2012–17*
42 Figure 25: Gene therapy financing volume proportion by gene therapy category, 2012–17*
43 Figure 26: Public offering volume proportion by gene therapy category, 2012–17*
43 Figure 27: Private placement volume proportion by gene therapy category, 2012–17*
53 Figure 28: Pfizer and Bamboo Therapeutics: deal structure
55 Figure 29: Gilead and Kite Pharma: deal structure
57 Figure 30: Biogen and the University of Pennsylvania: deal structure
58 Figure 31: Vertex and CRISPR Therapeutics: deal structure
LIST OF TABLES
15 Table 1: Top 10 gene therapy acquisitions by value, 2012–17*
27 Table 2: Top 10 gene therapy alliances by value, 2012–17*
45 Table 3: Top 10 gene therapy IPOs, 2012–17*
49 Table 4: Top 10 gene therapy venture financings, 2012–17*
© Informa UK Ltd. This document is a licensed product and is not to be reproduced or redistributed
Do you have a subscription to Datamonitor Healthcare, Biomedtracker or Meddevicetracker? You may already have access to these reports, contact your account manager or email pharma@informabi.com for further help or assistance.
Sign up to the