And so, another working week will soon draw to a close. Not a moment too soon, yes? This is, you may recall, our treasured signal to daydream about weekend plans. Our agenda is still shaping up, but will almost certainly include tidying up the Pharmalot grounds, promenading with the official mascots, and catching up on our reading. We also hope to hold another listening party, where the rotation will likely include this, this, this, this and this. And what about you? Once again, we will note the great outdoors are beckoning — a ride in the country, a walk along the shore, or a stroll through the woods are fine ways to rejuvenate. If the weather does not cooperate, you can park yourself in front of the telly and stream the time away. Or you could make time to reach out to someone special. Well, whatever you do, have a grand time. But be safe. Enjoy, and see you soon. …
U.S. drugmakers and biotechs have come to rely on Chinese partners for manufacturing, research and ingredients, but some of them are now looking for alternatives as geopolitical tensions rise, The Wall Street Journal says. From big pharmaceutical companies such as AstraZeneca to small biotechnology firms like Amicus Therapeutics, which is looking for a non-Chinese company to supply raw materials for its rare-disease treatment, the companies say it is time to reduce China risk. But industry officials say one consequence could be slower drug rollouts and higher costs in the U.S. because the shift takes time and money. U.S. and European companies often depend on China for basic chemistry services and pharmaceutical ingredients — which is why U.S.-China disputes over trade and military issues in recent years have shaken the industry. Executives say the cost for top-notch Chinese work is typically lower than in the West. Now, companies are “making choices based on lowering risks of relying on a single country or a couple of countries,” said Kymera Therapeutics chief executive officer Nello Mainolfi.
Of 104 reports of supply chain issues with dozens of drugs, meaningful shortages were 40% less likely to occur in Canada than in the U.S., a new study found, and the difference was largely attributed to the approach taken by the Canadian government to the problem, STAT tells us. Between 2017 and 2021, regulators in the U.S. and Canada received the same number of reports about actual or potential shortages for the same 96 medicines. Within a year, 49% of the 104 related reports received by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration were associated with a meaningful shortage, but only 34% of the reports for the same drugs filed with Health Canada reached that stage. The researchers examined the reports in the belief that when reports are made, regulators and local governments may be able to take steps before supplies are truly depleted and, therefore, can prevent actual shortages from occurring.
This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers
Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.
Already have an account? Log in