Seqens Seqens

X
menu

    Market Place

    Market Place

    Post Enquiry

    Post Enquiry
    menu

    Find PharmaFlow Article for AM20070534

    Client Email Product

    AM20070534

    APIs // Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients

    DEVELOPMENTS

    PRICE INFORMATION

    INTERMEDIATES

    DOSSIERs // Finished Dosage Formulations

    DRUG PRODUCT COMPOSITION

    RELATED EXCIPIENT COMPANIES

    EXCIPIENTS BY APPLICATIONS

    GLOBAL SALES INFORMATION

    MARKET PLACE

    PATENTS

    ANALYTICAL SOLUTION(s)

    DIGITAL CONTENT

    PharmaCompass
    Product SearchProduct Search
    API SUPPLIERS
    API Suppliers

    API Suppliers

    66
    US DMFs Filed

    US DMFs Filed

    34
    CEP/COS Certifications

    CEP/COS Certifications

    0

    JDMFs Filed

    JDMFs Filed

    11
    Other Certificates

    Other Certificates

    15
    Other Suppliers

    Other Suppliers

    37
    API REF. PRICE (USD / KG)
    604

    API Market Place

    13
    INTERMEDIATES
    15
    DOSSIERS // FDF
    USA (Orange Book)

    USA (Orange Book)

    125
    Europe

    Europe

    230
    Canada

    Canada

    11
    Australia

    Australia

    14
    South Africa

    South Africa

    8
    Uploaded Dossiers

    Uploaded Dossiers

    72
    GLOBAL SALES (USD Million)

    U.S. Medicaid

    7,753.00

    Annual Reports

    71.00

    FDF Market Place

    5
    EXCIPIENTS
    280
    PATENTS & EXCLUSIVITIES

    USFDA Orange Book Patents

    66

    USFDA Exclusivities

    0

    DIGITAL CONTENT

    Blog #PharmaFlow

    4

    News

    84
    REF STANDARD

    EDQM

    0

    USP

    6

    JP

    0

    Other Listed Suppliers

    14
    SERVICES
    1
    left grey arrow
    right gray arrow
    • TABLET;ORAL - 10MG
    • TABLET;ORAL - 5MG
    • CAPSULE, EXTENDED RELEASE;ORAL - 14MG
    • CAPSULE, EXTENDED RELEASE;ORAL - 21MG
    • CAPSULE, EXTENDED RELEASE;ORAL - 28MG
    • CAPSULE, EXTENDED RELEASE;ORAL - 7MG
    BlogBlog
    Full View ScreenFull Screen View
    Top drugs and pharmaceutical companies of 2019 by revenues

    Top drugs and pharmaceutical companies of 2019 by revenues

    Acquisitions and spin-offs dominated headlines in 2019 and the tone was set very early with Bristol-Myers Squibb acquiring New Jersey-based cancer drug company Celgene in a US$ 74 billion deal announced on January 3, 2019. After factoring in debt, the deal value ballooned to about US$ 95 billion, which according to data compiled by Refinitiv, made it the largest healthcare deal on record. In the summer, AbbVie Inc, which sells the world’s best-selling drug Humira, announced its acquisition of Allergan Plc, known for Botox and other cosmetic treatments, for US$ 63 billion. While the companies are still awaiting regulatory approval for their deal, with US$ 49 billion in combined 2019 revenues, the merged entity would rank amongst the biggest in the industry. View Our Interactive Dashboard on Top drugs by sales in 2019 (Free Excel Available) The big five by pharmaceutical sales — Pfizer, Roche, J&J, Novartis and Merck Pfizer continued to lead companies by pharmaceutical sales by reporting annual 2019 revenues of US$ 51.8 billion, a decrease of US$ 1.9 billion, or 4 percent, compared to 2018. The decline was primarily attributed to the loss of exclusivity of Lyrica in 2019, which witnessed its sales drop from US$ 5 billion in 2018 to US$ 3.3 billion in 2019. In 2018, Pfizer’s then incoming CEO Albert Bourla had mentioned that the company did not see the need for any large-scale M&A activity as Pfizer had “the best pipeline” in its history, which needed the company to focus on deploying its capital to keep its pipeline flowing and execute on its drug launches. Bourla stayed true to his word and barring the acquisition of Array Biopharma for US$ 11.4 billion and a spin-off to merge Upjohn, Pfizer’s off-patent branded and generic established medicines business with Mylan, there weren’t any other big ticket deals which were announced. The Upjohn-Mylan merged entity will be called Viatris and is expected to have 2020 revenues between US$ 19 and US$ 20 billion and could outpace Teva to become the largest generic company in the world, in term of revenues.  Novartis, which had followed Pfizer with the second largest revenues in the pharmaceutical industry in 2018, reported its first full year earnings after spinning off its Alcon eye care devices business division that had US$ 7.15 billion in 2018 sales. In 2019, Novartis slipped two spots in the ranking after reporting total sales of US$ 47.4 billion and its CEO Vas Narasimhan continued his deal-making spree by buying New Jersey-headquartered The Medicines Company (MedCo) for US$ 9.7 billion to acquire a late-stage cholesterol-lowering therapy named inclisiran. As Takeda Pharmaceutical Co was busy in 2019 on working to reduce its debt burden incurred due to its US$ 62 billion purchase of Shire Plc, which was announced in 2018, Novartis also purchased the eye-disease medicine, Xiidra, from the Japanese drugmaker for US$ 5.3 billion. Novartis’ management also spent a considerable part of 2019 dealing with data-integrity concerns which emerged from its 2018 buyout of AveXis, the gene-therapy maker Novartis had acquired for US$ 8.7 billion. The deal gave Novartis rights to Zolgensma, a novel treatment intended for children less than two years of age with the most severe form of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Priced at US$ 2.1 million, Zolgensma is currently the world’s most expensive drug. However, in a shocking announcement, a month after approving the drug, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a press release on data accuracy issues as the agency was informed by AveXis that its personnel had manipulated data which the FDA used to evaluate product comparability and nonclinical (animal) pharmacology as part of the biologics license application (BLA), which was submitted and reviewed by the FDA. With US$ 50.0 billion (CHF 48.5 billion) in annual pharmaceutical sales, Swiss drugmaker Roche came in at number two position in 2019 as its sales grew 11 percent driven by its multiple sclerosis medicine Ocrevus, haemophilia drug Hemlibra and cancer medicines Tecentriq and Perjeta. Roche’s newly introduced medicines generated US$ 5.53 billion (CHF 5.4 billion) in growth, helping offset the impact of the competition from biosimilars for its three best-selling drugs MabThera/Rituxan, Herceptin and Avastin. In late 2019, after months of increased antitrust scrutiny, Roche completed its US$ 5.1 billion acquisition of Spark Therapeutics to strengthen its presence in gene therapy. Last year, J&J reported almost flat worldwide sales of US$ 82.1 billion. J&J’s pharmaceutical division generated US$ 42.20 billion and its medical devices and consumer health divisions brought in US$ 25.96 billion and US$ 13.89 billion respectively.  Since J&J’s consumer health division sells analgesics, digestive health along with beauty and oral care products, the US$ 5.43 billion in consumer health sales from over-the-counter drugs and women’s health products was only used in our assessment of J&J’s total pharmaceutical revenues. With combined pharmaceutical sales of US$ 47.63 billion, J&J made it to number three on our list. While the sales of products like Stelara, Darzalex, Imbruvica, Invega Sustenna drove J&J’s pharmaceutical business to grow by 4 percent over 2018, the firm had to contend with generic competition against key revenue contributors Remicade and Zytiga. US-headquartered Merck, which is known as MSD (short for Merck Sharp & Dohme) outside the United States and Canada, is set to significantly move up the rankings next year fueled by its cancer drug Keytruda, which witnessed a 55 percent increase in sales to US$ 11.1 billion. Merck reported total revenues of US$ 41.75 billion and also announced it will spin off its women’s health drugs, biosimilar drugs and older products to create a new pharmaceutical company with US$ 6.5 billion in annual revenues. The firm had anticipated 2020 sales between US$ 48.8 billion and US$  50.3 billion however this week it announced that the coronavirus  pandemic will reduce 2020 sales by more than $2 billion. View Our Interactive Dashboard on Top drugs by sales in 2019 (Free Excel Available)  Humira holds on to remain world’s best-selling drug AbbVie’s acquisition of Allergan comes as the firm faces the expiration of patent protection for Humira, which brought in a staggering US$ 19.2 billion in sales last year for the company. AbbVie has failed to successfully acquire or develop a major new product to replace the sales generated by its flagship drug. In 2019, Humira’s US revenues increased 8.6 percent to US$ 14.86 billion while internationally, due to biosimilar competition, the sales dropped 31.1 percent to US$ 4.30 billion. Bristol Myers Squibb’s Eliquis, which is also marketed by Pfizer, maintained its number two position and posted total sales of US$ 12.1 billion, a 23 percent increase over 2018. While Bristol Myers Squibb’s immunotherapy treatment Opdivo, sold in partnership with Ono in Japan, saw sales increase from US$ 7.57 billion to US$ 8.0 billion, the growth paled in comparison to the US$ 3.9 billion revenue increase of Opdivo’s key immunotherapy competitor Merck’s Keytruda. Keytruda took the number three spot in drug sales that previously belonged to Celgene’s Revlimid, which witnessed a sales decline from US$ 9.69 billion to US$ 9.4 billion. Cancer treatment Imbruvica, which is marketed by J&J and AbbVie, witnessed a 30 percent increase in sales. With US$ 8.1 billion in 2019 revenues, it took the number five position. View Our Interactive Dashboard on Top drugs by sales in 2019 (Free Excel Available) Vaccines – Covid-19 turns competitors into partners This year has been dominated by the single biggest health emergency in years — the novel coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. As drugs continue to fail to meet expectations, vaccine development has received a lot of attention.  GSK reported the highest vaccine sales of all drugmakers with total sales of US$ 8.4 billion (GBP 7.16 billion), a significant portion of its total sales of US$ 41.8 billion (GBP 33.754 billion).   US-based Merck’s vaccine division also reported a significant increase in sales to US$ 8.0 billion and in 2019 received FDA and EU approval to market its Ebola vaccine Ervebo. This is the first FDA-authorized vaccine against the deadly virus which causes hemorrhagic fever and spreads from person to person through direct contact with body fluids. Pfizer and Sanofi also reported an increase in their vaccine sales to US$ 6.4 billion and US$ 6.2 billion respectively and the Covid-19 pandemic has recently pushed drugmakers to move faster than ever before and has also converted competitors into partners. In a rare move, drug behemoths  — Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) —joined hands to develop a vaccine for the novel coronavirus. The two companies plan to start human trials in the second half of this year, and if things go right, they will file for potential approvals by the second half of 2021.  View Our Interactive Dashboard on Top drugs by sales in 2019 (Free Excel Available)  Our view Covid-19 has brought the world economy to a grinding halt and shifted the global attention to the pharmaceutical industry’s capability to deliver solutions to address this pandemic.  Our compilation shows that vaccines and drugs for infectious diseases currently form a tiny fraction of the total sales of pharmaceutical companies and few drugs against infectious diseases rank high on the sales list. This could well explain the limited range of options currently available to fight Covid-19. With the pandemic currently infecting over 3 million people spread across more than 200 countries, we can safely conclude that the scenario in 2020 will change substantially. And so should our compilation of top drugs for the year. View Our Interactive Dashboard on Top drugs by sales in 2019 (Free Excel Available)   

    Impressions: 54752

    subscribeSubscribe
    ExcelExcel Download

    https://www.pharmacompass.com/radio-compass-blog/top-drugs-and-pharmaceutical-companies-of-2019-by-revenues

    #PharmaFlow by PHARMACOMPASS
    29 Apr 2020
    Share Share
    Did a 29 year-old show GlaxoSmithKline that it made a billion dollar mistake?

    Did a 29 year-old show GlaxoSmithKline that it made a billion dollar mistake?

    29 year-old healthcare investor, Vivek Ramaswamy, bought an old Alzheimer's drug that GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) had dropped for $5 million. Six months later, without doing any clinical development at all, the drug resulted in the biggest biotech IPO ever (Initial Public Offering), two weeks ago and got valued at over $2 billion!It’s clear that either GSK, or Wall Street, have no idea what they are talking about.  Indian American, Vivek Ramaswamy left “hedge fund QVT in May 2014 to form what is essentially a shell company, Roivant Sciences. In October 2014, Roivant spins off a subsidiary Axovant Sciences”. Axovant then bought an Alzheimer’s experimental drug for $5m in December from GSK, which had shelved the compound four years ago after testing it in 13 trials and 1,250 patients. Is the world really crazy to trust a 29 year-old more than GSK?The miracle drugSetting aside allegations that the IPO was designed to favor Ramaswamy’s hedge fund friends and family, the drug: 3-Phenylsulfonyl-8-(piperazin-1-yl) quinolone (also known as SB-742457 and RVT-101), failed to meet the desired endpoints in the several clinical trials that GSK ran.  However, there was one exception that when the drug is taken with widely used, Alzheimer’s treatment, Aricept, it showed a slower decline in cognition than Aricept alone. So what’s the big deal?Alzheimer's disease offers one of the most lucrative markets in the pharma business, with one analyst estimating the opportunity to be $20 billion. However, the drug research is also considered to be a “wild-goose chase” given the limited understanding of the disease’s biology, which in turn makes clinical trials very expensive to run. From 2002 to 2012, there was just a .04% success rate (or 99.6% failure rate) of Alzheimer’s drugs meeting the standard. It’s all about the people!Axovant has assembled a team, which includes Aricept developer, Lawrence Friedhoff (developer of the second-most widely used drug to treat Alzheimer’s disease, Namenda) and Atul Pande (former head of the neurosciences unit of GSK that led the development of RVT-101). Axovant’s all-star team has taken on the responsibility to bring the drug to market and Wall Street valuation believes this will be possible.  Wall Street expectations aside, could Glaxo really be this wrong?Drugs under clinical research constantly get picked up and dropped. Rejection is really no big deal since many molecules get rejected by the FDA in the first review only to be approved years later. The list is surprisingly long for products, which got rejected before being approved and includes: thrice rejected Aveed (testosterone) by Endo Pharmaceuticals, weight loss pill Belviq (lorcaserin), almost approved “female Viagra” Flibanserin and many more. In the case of the antibiotic oritavancin (Orbactiv), it took more than 20 years to come to market and involved four ownership changes before it got final approval. The big question however is always whether the fate will be surreal like that of pirfenidone, or a horror story like Diapep277. InterMune’s pirfenidone, got rejected by the FDA in 2010 due to the drug’s unconvincing efficacy at the time, only to be approved last year and get acquired by Roche for $8.5 billion. Potential type I diabetes treatment DiaPep277 is however a horror story. Licensed to Sanofi by the originator, Peptor Ltd., it got returned by the French pharma giant two years later, only to generate Teva’s interest. Teva invested $170 million to fund further clinical trials. However, the drug underwent a series of changes in ownership and finally, when Hyperion acquired rights to the drug last year, for an amount that could have reached $570 million, they found that the clinical data had been falsified…Hyperion subsequently cancelled the acquisition! Wish to join the Axovant party?It’s clear that rejection of a drug at any stage is never the end of the road for that particular molecule since it can always emerge in a different format to get approval. There is a significant shift, where a significant amount of clinical trial data is going to be made public by pharmaceutical companies. It may be worthwhile to adopt an Axovant model and move some resources from the lab bench to the computer screen! The other reason to look for once-rejected drugs is that their valid patent life would be effectively shorter, when compared with ‘first-time-through’ products.Axovant’s success will benefit patients of Alzheimer’s and certainly make GSK conduct a serious internal review on how they handle their drug development programs.  

    Impressions: 10529

    subscribeSubscribe
    ExcelExcel Download

    https://www.pharmacompass.com/radio-compass-blog/did-a-29-year-old-show-glaxosmithkline-that-it-made-a-billion-dollar-mistake

    #Phispers by PHARMACOMPASS
    25 Jun 2015
    Share Share
    Pharma Chess: Strategies adopted in the United States to block generics

    Pharma Chess: Strategies adopted in the United States to block generics

    When a generic drug comes to the U.S. market, sales of brand drugs crash. The drop is more than 80% by the time a second- or third- generation generic arrives.For brand companies, used to high profits for years, the imminent generic threat leads to an aggressive search for ‘solutions’, and creative strategies to maximize returns from their products. What kind of blocking tactics are used to stop generic competition?In an attempt to delay generic competition, here are some of the commonly used approaches. 1/ Go legal:While a new drug patent is difficult to invent around, there are brand drugs with weak patents which may not withstand scrutiny. In such cases, the brand drug manufacturer files a patent infringement complaint with the FDA. The mere filing of the complaint triggers an automatic 30-month stay of FDA approval, as per the provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act. Understanding the Hatch-Waxman Act:In 1984, a United States federal law was designed to encourage the manufacture of generic drugs by  pharmaceutical industry. The amendments of the Act protect the first generic (the ‘first-filer’) to challenge the brand’s patent, by mandating that the FDA not approve any additional generic competitors until 180 days, after the first-filer launches its product. 2/ Sample obstruction:Brands attempt to prevent generic firms from accessing samples of the brand drug necessary to perform equivalence studies. The reason provided is that the brand drug falls under restricted distribution, part of the FDA-mandated programs, known as Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS). Brand firms also implement distribution restrictions for drugs that are not subject to REMS.3/ Destroy the product:Brand name pharmaceutical companies try to preserve the profits on a patented drug by making modest reformulations that offer little or no therapeutic advantages. This tactic is known as ‘product-switching’ or ‘product hopping’. In addition, prior to a generic launch, the brand drug simply withdraws its original product forcing patients to switch to the reformulated drug, so consumers don’t benefit from generic competition of the old version of the drug. Actavis’ ongoing Namenda litigation covers this example perfectly.4/ Change the rule of the game:In order to overcome the patents of the brand drugs, generic medicines are manufactured slightly differently, when compared with the brand product. Citizen petitions are filed with the FDA, at the behest of brand manufacturers, questioning the safety of the generic drug, due to the difference between the brand and generic products. A successful petition, changes the regulatory requirements, and makes it harder for generics to obtain FDA approval. The brand manufacturers were filing so many frivolous citizen petitions that the FDA has been denying them in record numbers. In the event, generic companies do manage to make significant inroads, and threaten the brand drug’s monopoly, there is a ‘pay-for-delay’ playbook. How does the ‘pay-for-delay’ game get played?Settlements are reached between brand and generic manufacturers in which the brand incentivizes the generic not to market their products. The incentives can involve any of the following options:- Cash payment made from the brand to the generic that claims to reimburse some or all of the generic’s litigation fees.- A side business deal between brand and generic manufacturers such as an agreement to buy active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) from the generic manufacturer, even though the brand has adequate supply of the API for their own needs (e.g. AstraZeneca, Ranbaxy’s Nexium deal).- Brand manufacturer promises not to market an Authorized Generic (AG) in competition with the generic manufacturer’s product for some period of time. AGs are pharmaceutical products, which are approved as brand-name drugs, but marketed as generic drugs. No authorized generics significantly reduce the competition for the generic player allowing them to secure greater market share and extract higher prices: e.g. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) paid Teva Pharmaceuticals to delay entry by promising not to compete with authorized generic versions of the drug Lamictal.- Brand allows the generic to market an authorized generic of a different product: e.g. AbbVie’s Androgel case against Teva had Teva asking for supply of an authorized generic of TriCor, a cholesterol drug with 2011 sales of more than $1 billion. - Other forms of compensation are offered to the generic patent challenger. For example, an agreement containing a declining royalty structure in which, the intellectual property is licensed by the brand to the generic. Alternativelly, a co-development deal can be struck for a new drug. Our view:The battle between brands and generics will continue for time to come, and regardless of antitrust scrutiny, there will be a high degree of innovation in the strategies devised by brand firms to maximize profits. However, drug companies aren’t the only ones innovating. Hayman Capital wins our vote for the most innovative approach taken. The hedge fund’s “Dispute the patent, short the stock” formula is designed to try and make money regardless of the outcome. How exactly the healthcare system benefits from these different approaches is a completely different story!Click here and learn about the latest ‘pay-for-delay’ cases in Europe and America  

    Impressions: 2717

    subscribeSubscribe
    ExcelExcel Download

    https://www.pharmacompass.com/radio-compass-blog/pharma-chess-strategies-adopted-in-the-united-states-to-block-generics

    #Phispers by PHARMACOMPASS
    04 Jun 2015
    Share Share
    Dr. Reddy’s expansion plans for API production

    Dr. Reddy’s expansion plans for API production

    Unrelated to the inspection of the USFDA at the Dr. Reddys Srikakulam facility, Dr. Reddys sought permission from the Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change to expand their drug and intermediate manufacturing at three locations. All three chemical technical operation (CTO) units, CTO-I, CTO-II & CTO-III are located in Medak district and the announced planned capacity increases along with the anticipated capital investment were   Existing Capacity Planned Capacity Anticipated Investment CTO I 14.7 TPM 45.5 TPM Rs 30 crores CTO II 21.9 TPM 68.9 TPM Rs 45 crores CTO - III 4.45 TPM 28.1 TPM Rs 12 crores  *$1 million is approximately about Rs 6.2 crores & TPM is tons per month In addition, the declaration given by Dr. Reddys also mentions the various products which will be produced at each facility (table below). Needless to say, the plans are ambitious however with the growth witnessed by the Indian pharmaceutical industry over the past decade, one can understand Dr. Reddys commitment to investing further in their business.   Table Dr. Reddys production plans at various facilities Product Name Planned Capacity (TPM) Facility Location Alendronate Sodium Trihydrate 6.67 CTO - III Alfuzosin 2.33 CTO - I Altretamine 0.03 CTO - I Amlodipine Besylate 33.33 CTO - II Amlodipine Besylate 133.33 CTO - III Amlodipine Besylate ( Ethyl 4 [2- (pthalamide)ethoxy] aceto acetate (TDM-2) 100 CTO - II Amlodipine Maleate 30 CTO - III Amsacrine 0.07 CTO - I Anastrazole 0.83 CTO - II Aprepitant 3.33 CTO - III Aripiprazole 0.33 CTO - II Atomoxetine 1.67 CTO - III Atorvastatin  375.83 CTO - II Azacitidine 0.67 CTO - I Bicalutamide 0.03 CTO - II Bivalirudin 0.03 CTO - II Bivalirudin Trifluoro Acetate 0.03 CTO - I Bortezomib 0.03 CTO - I Cabazitaxel 0.02 CTO - I Candesartan cilexetil 6.67 CTO - II Cetirizine Hydrochloride 66.67 CTO - I  Cetirizine 16.67 CTO - II Ciprofloxacin 176.67 CTO - II Ciprofloxacin HCl  533.33 CTO - II Ciprofloxacin Lactate 33.33 CTO - II Clopidogrel Bisulfate 500 CTO - I Clopidogrel Premix 166.67 CTO - II Diluted Everolimus 5% (Everolimus) 0.33 CTO - II Disodium Pamidronate 0.33 CTO - III Docetaxel 1.9 CTO - I Dutasteride 3.33 CTO - II Esomeprazole magnesium 66.67 CTO - III Ezetimibe 3.33 CTO - II Fexofenadine Hydrochloride  500 CTO - I Finasteride 10 CTO - II Fluoxetine 110 CTO - I Fondaparinux Sodium 0.33 CTO - II Galantamine 0.03 CTO - II Gemcitabine 13.33 CTO - I Glimepiride 13.33 CTO - II Imatinib 0.17 CTO - I Irinotecan 0.33 CTO - I Ketorolac 66.67 CTO - II Lacidipine 5 CTO - III Lamotrigine 33.33 CTO - I Lansoprozole 8.33 CTO - III Letrozole 0.03 CTO - II Levocetrizine Di HCl 10 CTO - III Levofloxacin 200 CTO - II Lomustine 1.33 CTO - I Losartan Postassium 150 CTO - I Meloxicam 0.03 CTO - I Memantine HCl 3.33 CTO - II Mesalamine 0.03 CTO - II Metoprolol Succinate 266.67 CTO - II Moxifloxacin 116.67 CTO - II Norfloxacin  0.03 CTO - I Omeprazole 133.33 CTO - III Omeprazole Magnesium 50 CTO - III Omeprazole Sodium 10 CTO - III Omerprazole Form B 33.33 CTO - III Paclitaxel 0.33 CTO - I Pantoprazole Sodium 100 CTO - III paroxetine HCl 0.03 CTO - II Pemetrexed 0.67 CTO - I Rabeprazole Sodium 83.33 CTO - III Raloxifene 33.33 CTO - II Ramipril 100 CTO - III Repaglinide 6.67 CTO - II Rivastigmine 6.67 CTO - II Risperidone 13.33 CTO - I Rivastigmine 6.667 CTO - I Rizatriptan Benzoate 1.33 CTO - II Rocuronium Bromide 0.03 CTO - II Ropinrole HCl 1.83 CTO - III Rosiglitazone 3.33 CTO - II Sparfloxacin 3.33 CTO - I Tacrolimus 5 CTO - II Tadalafil 3.33 CTO - II Telmisartan 100 CTO - II Temozolamide 0.03 CTO - I Terbinafine HCl 133.33 CTO - III Tizanidine HCl 16.67 CTO - III Topotecan 0.07 CTO - I valganciclovir 0.03 CTO - I Vardenafil 3.33 CTO - II Voriconazole 8.33 CTO - III Ziprasidone Hydrochloride 100 CTO - I Zoledronic acid 0.33 CTO - III Zolmitriptan 0.83 CTO - I Zonisamide 0.03 CTO - II

    Impressions: 3086

    subscribeSubscribe
    ExcelExcel Download

    https://www.pharmacompass.com/radio-compass-blog/dr-reddy-s-expansion-plans-for-api-production

    #Phispers by PHARMACOMPASS
    03 Apr 2015
    Share Share
    Ask Us for Pharmaceutical Supplier and Partner
    Ask Us, Find A Supplier / Partner
    No Commissions, No Strings Attached, Get Connected for FREE

    What are you looking for?

    How can we help you?

    The request can't be empty

    Please read our Privacy Policy carefully

    You must agree to the privacy policy

    The name can't be empty
    The company can't be empty.
    The email can't be empty Please enter a valid email.
    The mobile can't be empty
    veranova-m-2024-04-22

    Access Virtual Booth

    Contact Supplier

    View Presentation

    JSC Olainfarm Memantine Hydrochloride

    Access Virtual Booth

    Contact Supplier

    View Presentation

    Post Enquiry
    POST ENQUIRY

    Market Place

    Market Place

    PharmaCompass

    Home

    Market Place

    Menu

    Post Enquiry

    Post Enquiry

    Market Place

    Market Place

    Search