The Mundipharma global network of independent associated companies shares a common purpose to identify and accelerate the development of meaningful medicines that add value for patients and healthcare providers around the globe.
Founded in the US by two physicians in 1952 and still privately owned, the network has a presence in over 120 countries, employing over 8,600 people and generating annual revenues in excess of $3.4 billion.
For Mundipharma, we completed the following programmes over the course of two years:
Shaped complex product portfolio and strategy Drove Mundipharma’s investment decision in its out-licensed antiseptic product portfolio (Betadine) through deep market and therapeutic area analysis (covering wound and skin including surgical, ocular, gynaecological and oral). Evaluated all SKUs against clinical efficacy, competition profile and growth potential, identified most attractive assets then made detailed strategic market and commercial justification for board to rationalise, restructure and reposition the portfolio for future growth. Our comprehensive, advanced insights and concepts into the current and future state of infection prevention and management practice, therapy area and market dynamics were instrumental in helping the client to make critical, complex strategic decisions.
Drove health payer value strategy For Mundipharma, led a vast in-depth, year-long qualitative and economic review of NHS payer “value hotspots” to identify most burdensome and costly problem and disease areas, the specific challenges of highest need and priority, and target assets and technologies with the potential to alleviate them. Supported internal evaluation and selection of key areas and assets on which to focus the company’s growth effort. Designed and implemented a value-based approach to opportunity assessment that continues to support growth and investment decisions today.
In-licensing of wound asset We assessed the clinical utility and commercial potential of a novel advanced wound dressing. Enjoying a dominant market share outside of Europe, the dressing claimed to outperform rivals on a number of advanced wound management technical performance dimensions.
Deploying our ecosystem framing methods and clinical wound care expertise, my client wished to determine if there was a substantive unmet need and market to justify in-licensing the dressing into Europe. Despite strong internal support to adopt the dressing, we recommended that the clinical and commercial case was not strong enough to merit investment.
Very often, it is hard to say “no” when assessing a new and at-face-value exciting technology. But, by performing an objective deep-dive into current practice to surface capability gaps, priorities and clinical use contexts as well as market factors influencing the likelihood of adoption, we were able to provide robust evidence for our client to confidently cease its interest.