{"title":"生物制药超级基金证券化的模式风险","authors":"Carlos E. Ortiz, C. A. Stone, A. Zissu","doi":"10.3905/jsf.2020.1.103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies are constantly challenged to raise sufficient capital to advance the development of the drug projects in their pipelines. The risk of capital becoming too costly or unavailable when it is needed can constrain the development and commercialization of important medical advances. Securitization has been discussed as a way to increase the flow of capital to clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies. For securitization to draw more capital into funding biopharmaceutical development, a technique for allocating the current and future cash flows associated with specific biopharmaceutical products must be developed. Fernandez et al. (2012), Fagnan et al. (2013), and Fagnan et al. (2014) have proposed a “mega-fund” scheme as the foundation for a clinical stage biopharmaceutical securitization structure. The securities issued to finance the “mega-fund” are called “Research Backed Obligations.” In this article, the authors modify their label by calling the securities structured biopharmaceutical-backed bonds (SBBBs). This model of the flows of cash through the SBBBs illustrates that it is not only the final number of projects that succeed that drives the value of the fund; also important are the timing of failure, the probability of failing in each phase of development, and the magnitude of success in each phase. TOPICS: Legal and regulatory issues for structured finance, fixed income and structured finance Key Findings • The pattern of drug development failure across the three phases of FDA clinical trials drives the portfolio value of the Biopharmaceutical Mega Fund. • Incorporating licensing/royalty agreements between clinical stage biopharmaceutical companies that are developing the drugs that compose the biopharmaceutical mega-fund and commercial stage biopharmaceutical companies into the securitization program will alleviate adverse selection issues that could depress the value of the securities issued by the mega-fund. • Pattern risk is the uncertain path of progress through the clinical stages of testing that the assets in the biopharmaceutical mega-fund follow. This risk can be managed by engineering the structured biopharmaceutical-backed bonds to account for variations in the patterns of clinical failure.","PeriodicalId":51968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Structured Finance","volume":"26 1","pages":"30 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pattern Risk of the Securitized Biopharmaceutical Mega-Fund\",\"authors\":\"Carlos E. Ortiz, C. A. Stone, A. Zissu\",\"doi\":\"10.3905/jsf.2020.1.103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies are constantly challenged to raise sufficient capital to advance the development of the drug projects in their pipelines. The risk of capital becoming too costly or unavailable when it is needed can constrain the development and commercialization of important medical advances. Securitization has been discussed as a way to increase the flow of capital to clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies. For securitization to draw more capital into funding biopharmaceutical development, a technique for allocating the current and future cash flows associated with specific biopharmaceutical products must be developed. Fernandez et al. (2012), Fagnan et al. (2013), and Fagnan et al. (2014) have proposed a “mega-fund” scheme as the foundation for a clinical stage biopharmaceutical securitization structure. The securities issued to finance the “mega-fund” are called “Research Backed Obligations.” In this article, the authors modify their label by calling the securities structured biopharmaceutical-backed bonds (SBBBs). This model of the flows of cash through the SBBBs illustrates that it is not only the final number of projects that succeed that drives the value of the fund; also important are the timing of failure, the probability of failing in each phase of development, and the magnitude of success in each phase. TOPICS: Legal and regulatory issues for structured finance, fixed income and structured finance Key Findings • The pattern of drug development failure across the three phases of FDA clinical trials drives the portfolio value of the Biopharmaceutical Mega Fund. • Incorporating licensing/royalty agreements between clinical stage biopharmaceutical companies that are developing the drugs that compose the biopharmaceutical mega-fund and commercial stage biopharmaceutical companies into the securitization program will alleviate adverse selection issues that could depress the value of the securities issued by the mega-fund. • Pattern risk is the uncertain path of progress through the clinical stages of testing that the assets in the biopharmaceutical mega-fund follow. This risk can be managed by engineering the structured biopharmaceutical-backed bonds to account for variations in the patterns of clinical failure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Structured Finance\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"30 - 44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Structured Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3905/jsf.2020.1.103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Structured Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3905/jsf.2020.1.103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
临床阶段的生物制药公司不断面临筹集足够资金以推进其管道中药物项目开发的挑战。资本成本过高或在需要时无法获得的风险可能会限制重要医疗进步的发展和商业化。证券化已被讨论为增加资本流向临床阶段生物制药公司的一种方式。为了使证券化吸引更多资本用于资助生物制药开发,必须开发一种分配与特定生物制药产品相关的当前和未来现金流的技术。Fernandez等人(2012)、Fagnan等人(2013)和Fagnan et al.(2014)提出了一项“超级基金”计划,作为临床阶段生物制药证券化结构的基础。为“超级基金”融资而发行的证券被称为“研究支持债券”。在这篇文章中,作者修改了他们的标签,将证券称为结构化生物制药支持债券(SBBB)。SBBB的现金流模型表明,推动基金价值的不仅是成功项目的最终数量;同样重要的是失败的时机、每个发展阶段失败的概率以及每个阶段成功的程度。主题:结构化金融、固定收益和结构化金融的法律和监管问题关键发现•美国食品药品监督管理局临床试验三个阶段的药物开发失败模式推动了生物制药超级基金的投资组合价值。•将正在开发构成生物制药超级基金的药物的临床阶段生物制药公司与商业阶段生物制药企业之间的许可/特许权使用费协议纳入证券化计划,将缓解可能压低超级基金发行证券价值的逆向选择问题。•模式风险是指生物制药大型基金中的资产在临床测试阶段所遵循的不确定的进展路径。这种风险可以通过设计结构化的生物制药支持债券来管理,以解释临床失败模式的变化。
Pattern Risk of the Securitized Biopharmaceutical Mega-Fund
Clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies are constantly challenged to raise sufficient capital to advance the development of the drug projects in their pipelines. The risk of capital becoming too costly or unavailable when it is needed can constrain the development and commercialization of important medical advances. Securitization has been discussed as a way to increase the flow of capital to clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies. For securitization to draw more capital into funding biopharmaceutical development, a technique for allocating the current and future cash flows associated with specific biopharmaceutical products must be developed. Fernandez et al. (2012), Fagnan et al. (2013), and Fagnan et al. (2014) have proposed a “mega-fund” scheme as the foundation for a clinical stage biopharmaceutical securitization structure. The securities issued to finance the “mega-fund” are called “Research Backed Obligations.” In this article, the authors modify their label by calling the securities structured biopharmaceutical-backed bonds (SBBBs). This model of the flows of cash through the SBBBs illustrates that it is not only the final number of projects that succeed that drives the value of the fund; also important are the timing of failure, the probability of failing in each phase of development, and the magnitude of success in each phase. TOPICS: Legal and regulatory issues for structured finance, fixed income and structured finance Key Findings • The pattern of drug development failure across the three phases of FDA clinical trials drives the portfolio value of the Biopharmaceutical Mega Fund. • Incorporating licensing/royalty agreements between clinical stage biopharmaceutical companies that are developing the drugs that compose the biopharmaceutical mega-fund and commercial stage biopharmaceutical companies into the securitization program will alleviate adverse selection issues that could depress the value of the securities issued by the mega-fund. • Pattern risk is the uncertain path of progress through the clinical stages of testing that the assets in the biopharmaceutical mega-fund follow. This risk can be managed by engineering the structured biopharmaceutical-backed bonds to account for variations in the patterns of clinical failure.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Structured Finance (JSF) is the only international, peer-reviewed journal devoted to empirical analysis and practical guidance on structured finance instruments, techniques, and strategies. JSF covers a wide range of topics including credit derivatives and synthetic securitization, secondary trading in the CDO market, securitization in emerging markets, trends in major consumer loan categories, accounting, regulatory, and tax issues in the structured finance industry.