Amgen Inc at Bank of America Merrill Lynch Healthcare Conference

London Sep 16, 2016 (Thomson StreetEvents) -- Edited Transcript of Amgen Inc presentation Friday, September 16, 2016 at 8:45:00am GMT

TEXT version of Transcript

================================================================================
Corporate Participants
================================================================================
   *  David Meline
      Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO
   *  Arvind Sood
      Amgen Inc. - VP- IR

================================================================================
Conference Call Participants
================================================================================
   *  Ying Huang
      Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst

================================================================================
Presentation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [1]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 My name is Ying Huang, and I'm the US large-cap analyst based on the New Office for BofA Merrill Lynch. We're very pleased to have Amgen, our next presenting Company. I don't think we need much introduction for Amgen, which is one of the biggest and also a most established biotech company in the world.
 With us we have both EVP and Chief Financial Officer, David Meline and also Arvind Sood, the VP of Investor Relation here. So again, I just want to thank you both for coming to London, and let me turn the podium to David and then we'll have Q&A later, when Arvind would also join us. Thank you, David.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [2]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Okay, thank you Ying. Good morning. Okay. So I'm really pleased to be here today to provide an update on the many positive things that are going on right now for us at Amgen. So obviously the Safe Harbor statement for your appreciation. In terms of kind headline themes, I guess, what I would just comment on your open is really four numbers, so 8, 13, 16 and 80. And what do those numbers reflect? Well, if you look at the 8, that's certainly indicative of the growth rate of the Company we've seen again in the first half of this year, the 8% growth, which is very consistent with the growth we've seen over the last now several -- three and a half years. 13% is the non-GAAP earnings growth we've seen here in the first half of 2016, which is again a very consistent with the growth we've seen in the mid-to-high teens over recent years. 16 is the 16% growth that we enjoyed in the first half of this year of our growth products, which is our half a dozen products that are in the growth phase for the Company and represent over 50% of the sales of the Company. So, products like Prolia, which again in the second quarter we had 23% volume growth, which is really driving the topline growth for the Company.
 And then finally 80, which is the country launches we have going on this year. So last year we launched six new products; four in oncology into two in cardiovascular in the US. And this year we're now rolling that portfolio of products out broadly across a number of countries.
 If you look at the execution in terms of topline, as I mentioned, 8% growth, 16% in our growth products. What's also important for us and the focus of a lot of discussion with investors is our management of our legacy products. So think about NEUPOGEN, EPOGEN and Neulasta, all of which have come now to a period past its exclusivity and the Company has been very active in ensuring that we have strategies in place to ensure continued significant sales of those products. So in the case of EPOGEN, we've actively been shifting those sales to our long acting Aranesp, which has been very successful and will enable us to continue with significant revenues going forward.
 In the case of Neulasta, we introduced an on-body injection device now about a year and a half ago, which enables the patients to avoid having to come back to the clinic the day after receiving chemotherapy by having a device that automatically injects the Neulasta 24 hours after chemotherapy. And as we exited the second quarter of this year, we saw that 40% of our sales had adopted the on pro device and that continues to rise. So we see a very nice shift and a strategy for maintaining our Neulasta share as and when we eventually see biosimilar competition come to us in the US.
 We're also delivering on our plan to improve the profitability and efficiency of the Company. So right now in the first half of the year, we're delivering operating margins of over 50% coming from an operating margin level of 38% in 2013. And I think importantly for us, we're delivering on those margin improvements, while continuing to invest heavily in the business, both globalizing the business and building out the franchise around the world, as well as for example, standing up now within those results, we've stood up a very significant cardiovascular franchise and we're continuing to invest through acquisitions to broaden our portfolio.
 To the point I earlier made, if you look at the Company's performance now over the past several years, very consistent track record of steady growth, increased margins, so we've increased -- at the end of last year, we've increased our operating margin by 10 percentage points, and as I mentioned, that continues to improve from there towards our 52% to 54% goal. And then our adjusted earnings per share have consistently been rising in the mid-teens.
 In terms of the guidance for our performance this year, we again raised the outlook for both revenue and earnings per share in 2016 to now $22.5 billion to $22.8 billion of revenue this year and $11.10 to $11.40 per share in terms of earnings.
 The Company is focused right now on six therapeutic areas. So you can see them listed here in the blue; oncology, inflammation, bone, nephrology; our latest franchise of course is in the cardiovascular area. And the next therapeutic area we will be standing up is in neuroscience based on the upcoming launch of a CGRP molecule.
 As I mentioned, we had six launches in the last year, which are shown here in red. And then we have a number of late-stage opportunities, both in innovative products and in biosimilars that are highlighted here in green.
 If you look at a couple of the key growth drivers for the Company going forward, certainly top of mind for us are Kyprolis and Repatha. So Kyprolis continues to expand in the second line, based on very strong data coming out of our ENDEAVOR and ASPIRE trials, and we've also got more work going on now in terms of combination studies.
 In the case of Repatha, this has been launched globally with very significant potential to change the standard of care in the cardiovascular disease area, and we've got a number of additional programs going on, really to support the launch and broadening of this program. So we're working hard right now to improve the access to this product, in particular, in the US, as well as negotiating reimbursement in Europe. We recently launched our Pushtronex, which is a single, monthly injection option for patients. And then we also are expecting in the very near term the read out of an IVUS study, as well as the outcomes trial, which we expect to be concluded in the first quarter of next year.
 We also have a number of additional late stage product opportunities, as you can see listed here. So, top of the list is romosozumab, which is a complement to our existing bone franchise with Prolia. We've submitted now the BLA to the FDA and this product has a very attractive monthly administration, which we think will be important to its success and adoption.
 We have Erenumab, which is our CGRP inhibitor for migraine. A very large market opportunity with 10 million to 14 million potential patients in the US. And we will see pivotal data from this product this year. And it's the only CGRP that's based on a receptor antibody. And we expect to be submitting for both episodic and chronic migraine.
 Parsabiv received a Complete Response Letter from the FDA recently. This CRL was not safety related, rather our intent is to discuss the label with the FDA to ensure that we have an appropriate reflection of the value of the product in the label.
 XGEVA, we have a Phase 3 multiple myeloma read out later this year. And then finally with omecamtiv mecarbil for heart failure, we've made a decision to advance that product to Phase 3, based on strong Phase 2 data.
 We're also growing our immuno-oncology platforms. So within the area bispecific antibodies, we have approved and in the market BLINCYTO for ALL. We're also developing AMG 330 for AML and AMG 420 for multiple myeloma. And we're also in a collaboration with Xencor in this area, including an anti-CD38.
 IMLYGIC, which we're developing now in combination with checkpoint inhibitors and we've seen some very encouraging Phase 1 data. And then finally, we've got separate collaborations with both Kite and Advaxis in the area of immuno-oncology.
 This is a summary now of our key late stage pipeline milestones, which I've touched on most of them already. The one I just like to highlight here is that we continue on track with the development of nine biosimilar molecules in our portfolio. And we've listed three of those here, which are either in Phase 3 or have been completed and are awaiting final approval. So those being biosimilars for Avastin, HUMIRA and Herceptin.
 In terms of capital allocation, we also have a commitment as part of our plan through 2018 to provide 60% of adjusted net income as a return to shareholders via dividends and share repurchase. And you can see here, again this year, we raised our dividend by 27% and we'll be repurchasing $2 billion to $3 billion worth of shares this year.
 So, in summary, the business continues to run very well. 8% topline growth, 13% non-GAAP EPS growth. We're effectively, as I mentioned, managing the life cycle of our mature products, investing in our launch products to really see success globally for them, advancing our late-stage pipeline, both innovative and biosimilars. And also we have a very significant focus and leadership position based on generic insight into the disease, which will give us a competitive advantage going forward. We're transforming the Company for speed and efficiency and investing for the long term, while meeting our commitments through 2018.
 So with that, I'd be happy to take any questions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [3]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 If there any questions from the floor, please raise your hand, we'll get a mike to you.

================================================================================
Questions and Answers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidentified Audience Member   [1]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Thank you. Just looking at your base business, what do you think are the biggest threats? There are certainly potential moving parts at the moment. Is it biosimilar rEPO, is it the potential arrival of the HIFs, biosimilar G-CSF, Enbrel IP et cetera, et cetera. And what do you see there when you look at your base business, in putting your forecast together and thinking right this is the thing where there is most variability to forecasts and the things we are at most risk from?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [2]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Sure. Now it's a good question and it's one of the reasons that I take some time to talk about the legacy part of the portfolio, which is made up of EPOGEN, NEUPOGEN and Neulasta, because certainly there's been a focus both within the Company and externally around the threats to that legacy franchise. All of those products, of course, now have been off patent up to three years. And we are seeing competition in the case of EPOGEN and NEUPOGEN, which is impacting the sales of those products. What I would say is, because of that expected competition we have made decisions to invest, to protect those franchises, and despite the fact that if you look in the first half, EPOGEN sales are down almost 40% and NEUPOGEN in the second quarter was down a little over 20% due to competition, we're still growing the topline overall at 8%.
 So the fact is, is a couple of years ago as we faced into the threats to that legacy core franchise, we doubled down in terms of investing for new products to replace those and secondly, we took on this transformation to ensure that we are, if not the most competitive and agile company in the space, were amongst the best and we feel very good right now about our positioning, both in terms of running the business tightly and effectively and successfully making the transition through a period of patent expiry for those original franchise products.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidentified Audience Member   [3]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I have a question on Repatha in the PCSK9 litigation that you're engaged in with Sanofi and Regeneron at the moment. Any thoughts on timing of when we could hear something on the injunction decision and is this something which ultimately makes sense for Amgen to settle? It's a big market, there's a lot of penetration issues there, maybe having more than one player in the market is actually beneficial over the long-term.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [4]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Yes. So, first of all, as you may know, there was the initial outcome from the trial in May which upheld all of the questions that were being considered in Amgen's favor. And we've since asked for an injunction to take the alternative product off the market and we're waiting for the Judge's decision around that injunction right now and we think that it could happen imminently, or it could take a little more time, depending on what their own schedule is. But we feel good about the product, we certainly have adequate capability to supply the entire market. And from our perspective, we choose not to license any of our innovative products that we've developed and we don't see any reason why we would choose in this case, when you have a case of infringement that you would choose to license out this innovative product.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [5]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 So, David, I have a question regarding the margin expansion. Obviously you guys laid out the goals for 2018 back two years ago. I think at that point, market including myself, was a little skeptical that you have proven to the market now that -- in fact last quarter you're already above 50%. So given where you are, if you look forward from here, where are the opportunities for further improvement in your financial performance? What about increasing dividend further or more significant share buybacks?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [6]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Yes. So first of all, by way of background, in 2013, as I've already mentioned, we were running at a 38% operating margin. There was a lot of concern in the market about -- as per the first question here today, around the threats to the business, how would we navigate through a period of significant product development and launches, while facing competition on the legacy franchise. And so, one of the things we did was we offered guidance and commitments through 2018, as to we felt we could deliver double-digit earnings growth and improve the financial performance of the Company through this period of transition and we also indicated that we could invest in the business and provide very nice shareholder returns. And as you just mentioned, Ying, we see that now we're exactly halfway through that five year period and indeed we're delivering on all of those commitments and we've substantially improved the profitability of the Company, almost to the level of our commitment to get it to 52% to 54%. And I think importantly, we've done that while also standing up a cardiovascular franchise and building out the business globally. So, we feel encouraged by the progress in that regard. We have some more to do and we're also building into the Company really processes to have a culture of continuous opportunities, to continuously innovate and become more efficient, which we think will pay off in the future.
 And then in terms of returns to shareholders, the mission of the Company, how we create value is by investing in innovation, both internally in our own pipeline and we continue to be very active looking for acquisition opportunities, and those I would say are our first priority. But certainly based on the strong and stable profitability of the Company, we're in a privileged position to also offer very steady growth in dividends and ongoing share repurchases. So we think we have a combination that can accomplish all of those tasks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [7]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Can we get a microphone here?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidentified Audience Member   [8]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hi. Do you mind talking a bit about the biosimilar opportunity, and in particular on the HUMIRA one, because obviously in the light of the payers making some money on the rebate, how big that opportunity can be and how aggressive would have pricing to be?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [9]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Yes. So in terms of our efforts to launch biosimilar products, as I mentioned, we have nine molecules under development, which we've had now a program for several years. What I would say is a couple things. One is, we're pleased with the progress, because from a development perspective we remain on schedule with those products. And what we observe is that this is indeed a difficult challenge from a technology perspective, as we see a number of the other potential entrants in the market are experiencing delays in their developments, including as they hope to compete against our products, which affirms to us that we believe the market will develop such that the leaders in the market, at least in the US, will be companies that have strong technology and manufacturing capability and also have a strong reputation for safety and reliability in supply, because as we survey potential customers, they express a view that the reputation on the manufacturer is going to be very important for them to have the confidence to take on a biosimilar product.
 So we think indeed we have an opportunity to be one of the leaders in the market when we launch. The most advanced of the biosimilars is indeed the HUMIRA biosimilar, which we're expecting this month, actually, there is a review for approval of that product. And then, of course, what's -- as you would know, the pathway to the market in terms of the regulatory pathway is still being defined and we're participating obviously on both sides of that equation. So yet to be finalized some of the specifics as to that pathway. But what we see, at least in the foreseeable future in the US is a market that looks more like a branded market than, if you will, a generics market for biosimilars, where the reputation of the manufacturer is important. We've said we think that pricing, say, in the 20% to 30% range vis-a-vis the innovators is what one might expect and certainly the initial launch into the market has been consistent with that expectation. And we think that biosimilars are coming and will have an impact. I mean it's a policy objective in the US to create more competition. And we think we'll be able to participate successfully in that market.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Arvind Sood,  Amgen Inc. - VP- IR   [10]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 And I would just add to what David has said that we have the core capabilities that are required to succeed in this business. Our view is that manufacturing is critical. We have a long history of successful and reliable manufacturing. We think commercialization skills are going to be required. Again, these products at least for some duration of time are not going to be deemed as being interchangeable. So these products will have to be commercialized by their own distinct trade names.
 And, lastly, the ability to successfully navigate through a regulatory framework, to actually get these products approved. And the nine products that we're developing that David has highlighted, in a branded form actually generate revenues of over $50 billion. And we've estimated that this could be about a $3 billion opportunity for us down the road.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidentified Audience Member   [11]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Thank you. Managed care has been really aggressive within diabetes in the US recently, looks like maybe immunology is next. As you look towards negotiations next year, or any chats you're having with managed care at the moment, do you sense -- is immunology the next diabetes? Is it feeling like, in an area, where they have been price increases taken, this is the next place the cross-hairs will find?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [12]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I would say -- yes, so I guess from a planning perspective, in terms of our discussions with payers, certainly I think a couple things are true. One is that we'll continue to see pressure in the US market on pricing, whether that be coming from the regulatory side, whether it comes from the payers, we expect that as a permanent part of the landscape for the Company, for any company in the industry. And I think what -- you know, our view of that is a couple of things. One is as we plan the business going forward, we have to plan conservatively, assuming that type of pressure continues. And secondly, we think that plays to the strengths of those companies that are investing to launch products which are truly innovative and truly substantially change the standard of care and can be priced for the value that we offer to the market.
 So, in particular, as we look at our pipeline, we're very ruthless in terms of ensuring that we're only funding programs that are not a small incremental change, but looking for significant incremental improvements in the standard of care and likewise, to be an early entrant into any market we think is going to be important for success going forward. And then finally, as I've talked about already today, we think the winners in the market are going to be those companies that run their operation most efficiently, while offering truly innovative products and that's frankly where we plan to be as Amgen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidentified Audience Member   [13]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I was wondering if you could talk about romosozumab and how you look at the commercial potential of the product, I guess in light of the lack of statistically significant non-vertebral benefits that's been in the FRAME study?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [14]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Sure, yes. So actually this weekend, we'll have some more of the data that's going to be shared here at a conference this weekend. So I think that'll allow the market to appreciate the opportunity for romosozumab, which we think is very significant. Certainly, as we already have a very strong presence in bone with Prolia, which continues to grow very nicely. So we see Prolia has been growing at a 30% annual clip. And if you look at the second quarter, the volume grew 23%. So we see this as being complementary and synergistic to Prolia. But maybe, Arvind, would you like to add a few comments on --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Arvind Sood,  Amgen Inc. - VP- IR   [15]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Our view is that there is clearly a market need for effective systemic anabolic therapies, which is what romosozumab will represent. As David pointed out, the pivotal data from the so-called FRAME study, this is the Phase 3 study that we conducted to seek registration. That's going to be presented at the ASBMR, or the American Society of Bone and Mineral Research meeting this week or this weekend.
 And in this particular study, we have demonstrated an improvement in the primary endpoint, which was vertebral fractures, but you're right, as far as non-vertebral fractures, which was a secondary endpoint, we didn't reach statistical significance. But despite that there was another secondary endpoint, which was clinical fractures. These are symptomatic fractures that physicians in particular are very concerned about. Clinical fractures is a composite endpoint of both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures and we did demonstrate an improvement, which was statistically significant.
 So from a commercialization standpoint, our view is that this is a once-monthly therapy. It can be given by subcutaneous administration. To David's point, this is a therapy that can be used both in combination with and sequentially to Prolia, a product that we already have. If you consider the existing anabolic therapy, which is Forteo that generates some revenues of about [$1.5 billion], that's a PTH analog, it's daily injections, and has a black box warning against osteosarcoma. So given the very clean side-effect profile that we've seen so far for romosozumab, our view is that we can build a very effective value proposition around this product.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidentified Audience Member   [16]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hi. Can you help us think about the commercial opportunity for Kyprolis? It seems like the multiple myeloma market is a bit more crowded than at the time of the Onyx acquisition, specifically thinking about trastuzumab.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Arvind Sood,  Amgen Inc. - VP- IR   [17]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 So good to see you [Jason]. So, you're right Jason, I think the overall market continues to evolve. In addition to daratumumab, there are couple of other products that have recently been launched in the market, those being the Bristol product EMPLICITI and the Takeda product Ninlaro. I think we have solidified our presence with Kyprolis as a very proteasome inhibitor in the third line setting, in the relapse refractory setting. Now, recently, we got the results from the so-called ASPIRE study, which was in the second line setting. These are patients who had relapse. And in this particular study, we demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS. So one of our key strategies with Kyprolis is to go from third line to second line, where the eligible and the addressable patient population of course is much larger. Darzalex, which is a CD38 antibody, for the most part, has been positioned today in the fourth line setting. So after the patient has relapsed, after the patient has established their status as being refractory to other therapies. Some of the initial data that we see with Darzalex is actually quite impressive. But when you talk to specialists in the multiple myeloma space, the thinking is that down the road the standard of care will be a combination of an IMiD. And Revlimid, for the most part, has become a backbone of therapy there, an effective proteasome inhibitor, and that's where we believe that Kyprolis has emerged so far as the best proteasome inhibitor within its class. And I think that was also established by the so-called ENDEAVOR study, in which we compared Kyprolis on a head to head basis to Velcade and demonstrated a doubling of PFS as compared to the group of patients that was treated the Velcade.
 And the third component that's going to be added of course are the antibodies, most likely products like Darzalex. So if you subscribe to the notion that the goal of therapy in the multiple myeloma patients is to get the best, deepest responses, then these combinations will become the standard of care down the road. And to that end, we are actually doing a Phase I dose finding study in combination with Darzalex, as well as Kyprolis.
 So this field will continue to evolve, but certainly based on the profile that we have seen so far with Kyprolis, we think we are very well positioned to be the best in class in terms of the proteasome inhibitor portion of the therapy that is used in these patients.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [18]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 So, Arvind, I had a follow-up on this one. Velcade could become generic in 2017 in United States. How do you think that could potentially impact the trajectory for Kyprolis? Do you think you'll be beneficiary of generic introduction of Velcade or do you think you could see some erosion?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Arvind Sood,  Amgen Inc. - VP- IR   [19]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Yes. Again, Ying, I think it gets back to the efficacy. I mean these are patients who are critically ill. And again, if you look at the result that we saw in the endeavor study, I mean that is a very compelling result, because there was a doubling of PFS, or progression-free survival in the Kyprolis group as compared to the group of patients that was treated with Velcade. So, in many ways, one of the issues that we often hear about is, well, hey, all of this sounds good, but what about the cost? I mean if you're combining all these regimens, isn't the cost going to become prohibitive? But with the genericism of Velcade and down the road also from Revlimid, actually that creates a lot of headroom for new innovative products to come on board, particularly those with superior efficacy, as we have the Kyprolis. So again, our view is that these combinations, kind of this cocktail approach, if you will, will become the standard of care down the road.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [20]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Since you just mentioned cost, maybe for David, pricing increase has been part of the growth driver for Amgen for the last few years. Given the recent media reports and also the politicians' rhetoric about your price in the US, it's been a big focus for investors as well. I think you did touch upon that, we should think conservatively going ahead. But how do you perceive the pricing power for an innovative company such as Amgen in this environment?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [21]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Yes, I would say that we continue to believe that the US market in particular will provide an environment that supports innovation. And to do that you have to be able to offer products and be compensated in the market for the value that you provide. So we continue to believe that notwithstanding the fact that there will be pressure on all of the manufacturers around price, which is frankly appropriate, as long as we continue to develop products that demonstrate value when we price accordingly, we think that there is a value opportunity and return opportunities in the US market, and more broadly around the world for products such as we're developing. So, we continue to view the point to be we need to provide value and price accordingly.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [22]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 You mentioned that the top priority for deployment of capital at Amgen will be probably acquisition. So, couple of follow-up on this one. First of all, what's your view of the valuation of the small to mid-cap biotech space in the market? Secondly, which therapeutic area would be the focus for your external M&A opportunities?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [23]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Yes, so actually just to clarify. So our top priority, the way we create value as an enterprise is by investing in innovation and finding new products to bring to the market. And our key value driver of course is our internal capability to innovate through drug discovery, including increasingly taking advantage of insight we have from human generics, based on the deCODE acquisition we did a few years ago. So core to the enterprise is our internal innovation capability. But what's also true, if you look at the Company's history, upwards to half of the products we brought to the market had some history of acquisition and we don't see that there is any reason to believe that that's going to change going forward, because there is a lot of innovation going on externally in the market. And so, we are focused on ensuring that we have good visibility on all the potential opportunities for acquisitions that are out there, in particular in the six therapeutic areas that I mentioned are our focus on the Company. And I would say we're looking broadly across all of those therapeutic areas for opportunities. What we've seen, of course, is there are more opportunities in early stage. And from a valuation perspective, we think that there are opportunities that are quite clear to generate a return for our shareholders. And then in late stage, which we've also continued to be active, looking at larger later stage potential acquisitions, less opportunities, highly contested, which we think will continue we're not the only company whose stated an interest in acquiring. And so our view is we continue to be disciplined in terms of looking at those opportunities to ensure that we have a chance to generate a return for our shareholders. And also using our scientific insight to identify opportunities where we might be the best buyer of such asset. So we'll continue to be active in that regard.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [24]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 We have one minute for a last question. Do you still stand by your goal of launching a biosimilar product in 2017?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [25]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Certainly what's true is, as I mentioned earlier, if you look at the nine products in development, all of them continue to be on the development time table that we set out for ourselves a couple of years ago. And what's also true is we've got an approval coming up on Humira biosimilar this month. What's also true is we are going to expect the approval pathway as being defined in the legal arena, and therefore, I think the path to launch -- there are still a number of open questions in that area that we'll just have to see how that plays out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ying Huang,  Bank of America-Merrill Lynch - Analyst   [26]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Okay, I guess there are no further questions. Thanks again for coming to London.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Meline,  Amgen Inc. - EVP & CFO   [27]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Thank you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2016 Thomson Reuters. All Rights Reserved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------