GLP-1 marketing growth, biosimilar competition and China top pharma’s Q2 earnings

If the most recent round of pharma quarterly earnings reports is any indication, the growth opportunities and market obstacles are coming into clearer focus. 

Broadly speaking, the Q2 earnings reports paint a picture of an industry willing to continue to spend where it can boost the topline while also deprioritizing efforts that are less profitable. 

Though many drugmakers notched double-digit year-over-year growth in revenue or net income, several notable companies are shrinking their marketing spend, lowering promotional costs where they can and restructuring organizations to streamline operations. 

This comes amid a surge of market pressures, including notably from biosimilar competition and a renewed focus on investments in China. Companies are working to defend and promote their current product offerings while also building out the next generation of drugs. 

Below are the key trends that emerged from the latest quarterly earnings reports released by leading pharma and biotech companies.

GLP-1s and pharma’s continued investment in marketing 

Marketing and commercial spending remained a significant priority for drugmakers, led once again by the GLP-1 manufacturers at the top. 

Eli Lilly’s marketing, selling and administrative expenses increased 25% year over year to $3.43 billion in Q2. The pharma giant’s leadership attributed this increase directly to promotional campaigns supporting active drug launches, especially those for its blockbuster GLP-1 offerings of Mounjaro and Zepbound. 

By exceeding market expectations, Lilly now projects year-end revenue to come in between $85 billion and $87 billion, which is up from its prior forecast.

For Danish rival Novo Nordisk, the launch of the oral version of its blockbuster weight-loss drug Wegovy continues to serve as a boon for the company. 

Novo announced that total cumulative Wegovy pill prescriptions exceeded 5 million within 30 weeks of launch, making it the strongest GLP-1 volume launch in U.S. history. 

Still, Novo’s sales and distribution costs for the quarter declined 13% year over year as its marketing strategy was increasingly focused on direct-to-patient marketing and expansion plays in the telehealth space.

When discussing the company’s need to take more scientific risks amid recent trial setbacks and competition from Lilly, Novo CEO Mike Doustdar pointedly said: “If you do not like failure, then you should not get into a pharma business.”  

For pharma mainstays like Johnson & Johnson, the push into new markets required serious capital. J&J saw its selling, marketing and administrative costs climb 9.2% year over year, hitting $6.43 billion and growing faster than sales. 

Medtech giant Abbott followed a similar trajectory, with its SG&A expenses jumping to $4.03 billion from $3.09 billion just a year ago.

For other major players, the increases in sales and marketing spend were explicitly connected to commercialization. 

Bristol Myers Squibb reported SG&A expenses of $1.83 billion, with growth driven primarily by commercial marketing investments, field-force deployment and launch activities supporting newly commercialized therapies. BMS also became the latest pharma giant to announce an AI infrastructure partnership, this time with Anthropic and NVIDIA.

Sanofi continued to put resources behind its growth portfolio as sales from recent launches increased 48.3% to $1.51 billion in Q2, driven largely by products including Ayvakit, Altuviio and Sarclisa. The French drugmaker’s selling and general expenses increased 9% at constant exchange rates (CER), in part because of the consolidation of recent acquisitions.

Shrinking marketing budgets

Not every drugmaker increased its marketing spend in Q2.

For the quarter, Pfizer‘s adjusted selling, informational and administrative expenses totaled $3.34 billion — representing a 1% operational decline. 

Compared to the first half of the year, that spending dropped 4% overall. The company attributed this to a $100 million reduction in promotional costs, achieved by eliminating broad outreach for much more precise digital targeting.

Moderna followed a similar path as its Q2 SG&A spend landed at $216 million, representing a 6% dip from the $230 million it spent in Q2 2025. 

Still, the biopharma’s leadership is sticking to its full-year guidance of roughly $1 billion in revenue as Moderna shifts its priorities from the massive, multi-channel brand campaigns of the pandemic era. 

Cost-cutting programs introduced 

Beyond marketing investments, companies are also eyeing significant savings.

In addition to its contracting marketing spend, Pfizer laid out plans to cut costs by $2.5 billion from 2027 through 2029.

GSK also launched “Accelerate Growth,” a three-year cost-savings program to achieve $2.5 billion in annual savings by 2029. The British pharma giant’s program will focus on simplifying the organization, streamlining support services and reallocating resources toward specialty medicines. Still, GSK reiterated that its SG&A investments are expected to remain broadly stable as it takes a more returns-based approach.

This follows a similar lead taken by Takeda, which already has a major cost-cutting strategy in place. The Japanese pharma giant stated in its earnings release that its 1.6% CER increase in SG&A expenses were offset by the enterprise-wide restructuring effort.

And while not a cost-cutting exercise, Amgen did make a monetarily significant acknowledgment. A few weeks before releasing its earnings report, the drugmaker disclosed that it agreed to a $74 million settlement with investors who allege that the company hid a $10.7 billion U.S. tax bill from the public.

China becomes a competitive threat 

Drugmakers continue to explore the investment potential in China, but it was the emerging competition in Asia that became a prominent discussion point in Q2 earnings calls. 

J&J cited negative effects from China’s volume-based acquisition policies on its MedTech advanced and general surgery portfolios. 

Meanwhile, Regeneron highlighted increased competition from Chinese companies, which it said benefit from domestic regulatory structures that allow for lower-cost development. Regeneron’s earnings release also pointed to lingering tariff risks, continued U.S.-China tensions and the impact of the Biosecure Act as pressures the drugmaker must navigate in the near term. 

Additionally, Pfizer pointed to the introduction of potential U.S. restrictions that could impact clinical trials, investments and licensing agreements involving Chinese biotech companies. 

Biosimilars and generics threats

Another major pressure facing pharma companies is the loss of exclusivity on established products. Going forward, drugmakers are increasingly mindful of the impact of both biosimilars and generics manufacturers on the performance of the business.

J&J’s blockbuster Stelara ran into biosimilar competition, the increasing adoption of novel classes and an unfavorable patient mix, which resulted in an approximately 760-basis-point negative impact on the company’s Innovative Medicines segment.

Regeneron faced a similar challenge with Eylea. Net sales in the U.S. for Eylea 2 mg fell 45% year over year to $412 million in Q2, reflecting lower unit volume amid biosimilar availability from other anti-VEGF treatments. 

Pfizer said it expects generic and biosimilar competition to have an approximately $1.1 billion unfavorable impact on revenue. Eliquis, Xeljanz and Vyndaqel/Vyndamax are among its products facing losses due to these market headwinds. 

Meanwhile, Teva had an interesting experience as the Israeli drugmaker increased its marketing spend on its key brands like Austedo, Ajovy and Uzedy in an attempt to offset a 31% drop in U.S. generics revenue.