Close

CPhI Annual Report 2020 Part 1: 2025 will see cell and gene therapy capacity shortages in the USA and 10+ mAb approvals in China

Note* - All images used are for editorial and illustrative purposes only and may not originate from the original news provider or associated company.

Related stories

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...
- Advertisement -

CPhI Annual Report – launched ahead of the first CPhI Festival of Pharma (5-16 October, 2020), the world’s largest digital pharma Expo – predicts dramatic growth of new mAb production in China, capacity shortages for cell and gene therapies in the USA, and the widespread global adoption of single-use technologies, but only limited continuous bioprocessing.

Three CPhI experts from BioPlan Associates – Vicky Qing XIA, Leo Cai Yang and Eric Langer – explore the rapidly changing global biologics markets, with special reference to the implications for contract outsourcing and China’s continued emergence as a hub for both bio innovation and contract services.

Remarkably, China is predicted to continue its rapid bio growth rates, with more than 10 new mAbs predicted to be launched per year in the country by 2025. In fact, the total market size will quadruple by 2025, reaching 120bn RMB, and rising further to 190bn RMB by 2030.

“As most early-stage biotech in China lack manufacturing facilities, the need for contract manufacturing services is rising quickly, and has been accelerated further by the 2016 MAH reforms,” commented Vicky XIA, Senior Project Manager at BioPlan Associates.

According to the CPhI report, bioprocessing outsourcing in China is currently highly stratified with four tiers and just one domestic company in tier one – WuXi Biologics – and a number of international CDMOs including BI, Lonza and Merck. However, by 2025 it is anticipated that as many as five more domestic CDMOs may have reached tier one status, with FDA and EU facility approvals. Significantly, pending regulatory changes for contract vaccine production will likely spur further rapid growth amongst the existing tier one CDMOs.

“WuXi Biologics in 2019 realized 35.3% of its total revenue of USD 0.57 billion from China, which is ~USD 0.2 billion and would translate to ~35% of the total biopharma outsourcing service market in China1. However, despite sizable growth in revenue, its overall share of the market will now fall, as the mAb market expands rapidly,” added XIA.

In terms of global manufacturing, Single Use Systems (SUS) are now far and away the leader at both pre-clinical and clinical stages, with nearly 85% now involving a substantial SUS component. Yet whilst its usage continues to grow, continuous bioprocessing is not anticipated to be in mainstream usage by 2025.

Eric Langer, President and Managing Partner of BioPlan Associates: “Because preclinical and clinical pipeline products require flexible manufacturing, SUS lends itself to these scales, but many of these will fail as they progress through the pipeline. This means that while more commercial-scale biologics are going to be made in SUS platforms, or hybrid systems, over the next 2+ years, stainless platforms are, and will remain, critical to bioprocessing as well.

The report also suggested that in the United States and Europe there is likely to be a cell and gene therapy capacity crunch by 2025, with CDMOs investing in this area already expanding to try and meet the pipeline’s demand. However, capacity alone is not the biggest challenge as there is a shortage of both specialized platforms, and trained personnel to operate them. Significantly, for some facilities in these emerging areas the equipment required for expansion and up-scaling may not yet exist, nor are regulatory authorities fully aligned with issues around patient treatments – which could slow approvals.

Tara Dougal, head of content at CPhI Festival of Pharma, commented: “This first part of the CPhI Annual Report arrives at a very poignant moment as the CPhI Festival of Pharma launches next month. The cell and gene therapy space is hugely fast-moving and we will run a session on the potential for M&As as both manufacturers and CDMOs try to buy-in expertise rather than build. More generally, our report also points to sustained bio growth in China, almost universal adoption of single use technologies, with continuous processing growing but from a far lower base. In fact, we have invited the Jefferson Institute for Bioprocessing to expand on this theme, as they will explore both current strategies and look ahead at future approaches for bio manufacturing. It’s one of the reasons we are so excited about the CPhI Festival of Pharma, as it provides a vital platform to meet and exchange ideas – at a time when the industry is changing quickly.”

To download a copy of the first part of the CPhI Annual Report, please visit Global Pharma Insights or register for early bird discount (ending September 20th) at the CPhI Festival of Pharma – the largest ever digital gathering of professionals with thousands of attendees from dozens of countries. Eric Langer will be part of the cell and gene therapy M&A session [Wednesday 7th, October), with the Jefferson Institute for Bioprocessing session on [Thursday 15th, October].

CPhI Annual Report expert summaries:

Eric Langer, President and Managing Partner, BioPlan Associates

Industry trends and opportunities in biopharma

  • Worldwide biopharmaceutical sales growing 12% annually
  • Expansion of biopharmaceutical R&D and manufacturing activities worldwide will ramp up demand for smaller CMOs in the future
  • Bioprocessing productivity will continue to increase incrementally
  • Biosimilars are resulting in new products players entering the industry, with new facilities being constructed
  • Continuous bioprocessing not anticipated to be adopted mainstream by 2025
  • A growing number of commercial-scale biologics will be made with single-use system platforms, but these will not replace stainless system platforms
  • Shortages of specialised platforms and skilled labour will lead to capacity shortfalls in Cell & Gene therapy production, particularly in North America and parts of Europe
  • Lack of equipment required for scale-up and poor alignment of regulatory authorities with issues around patient treatments may slow approvals for biologics

Vicky Qia and Leo Yang, BioPlan Associates

Future trends and opportunities in China

  • Recent regulatory reforms and growing market demand is driving investment in new biologics CDMOs
  • Five domestic CDMOs predicted to reach tier one status by 2025 with FDA and EU facility approvals on the horizon
  • China forecast to launch up to 10 commercial mAbs yearly over next 5-10 years
  • The growth of the Chinese biologics outsourcing market is projected over 30% CAGR between 2016 – 2021, and 13.5% CAGR between 2022 – 2030
  • China’s biopharma market to quadruple in value by 2025 and reach 120bn RMB

About CPhI

CPhI drives growth and innovation at every step of the global pharmaceutical supply chain from drug discovery to finished dosage. Through exhibitions, conferences and online communities, CPhI brings together more than 100,000 pharmaceutical professionals each year to network, identify business opportunities and expand the global market. CPhI hosts events in Europe, Korea, China, India, Japan, South East Asia, North America, and the Middle East and Africa. Co-locating with ICSE for contract services; P-MEC for machinery, equipment & technology; InnoPack for pharmaceutical packaging; bioLIVE for biopharma; and Finished Dosage Formulation for every aspect of the finished dosage supply chain.

About Informa Markets

Informa Markets creates platforms for industries and specialist markets to trade, innovate and grow. Our portfolio is comprised of more than 550 international B2B events and brands in markets including Healthcare & Pharmaceuticals, Infrastructure, Construction & Real Estate, Fashion & Apparel, Hospitality, Food & Beverage, and Health & Nutrition, among others. We provide customers and partners around the globe with opportunities to engage, experience and do business through face-to-face exhibitions, specialist digital content and actionable data solutions. As the world’s leading exhibitions organiser, we bring a diverse range of specialist markets to life, unlocking opportunities and helping them to thrive 365 days of the year.

Never miss a pharmaceutical headline

The pharmaceutical industry moves fast – stay on top of it with our must - read briefings.

  • The top pharma and life sciences stories, straight to your inbox
  • The biggest news, features, interviews, and analysis
  • Dedicated coverage of the key developments driving the global pharmaceutical sector

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access the Media Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Latest stories

Related stories

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access theMedia Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Translate »