Pfizer, Inc. (PFE) Q1 2018 Earnings Conference Call Transcript

Pfizer, Inc. (PFE -0.19%)
Q1 2018 Earnings Conference Call
May 1, 2018, 10:00 a.m. ET

Contents:

• Prepared Remarks
• Questions and Answers
• Call Participants

Prepared Remarks:

Operator

Good day everyone and welcome to Pfizer's first quarter 2018 earnings conference call. Today's call is being recorded. At this time, I will like to turn the call over to Mr. Chuck Triano, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Chuck Tirano -- Senior Vice President of Investor Relations

Good morning and thank you for joining us today to review Pfizer's first quarter 2018 performance.

I'm joined today by our chairman and CEO, Ian Read, Albert Bourla, our Chief Operating Officer, Frank D'Amelio, our CFO, Mikael Dolsten, President of Worldwide Research and Development, and Doug Lankler, General Counsel.

The slides that will be presented on this call can be viewed on our website, Pfizer.com/investors. Before we start, I would like to remind you that our discretion during this conference call will include forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could call actual results to different material from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Additional information regarding these factors is discussed under the disclosure notice section in the earnings release we issued this morning as well as in Pfizer's 2017 annual report on form 10k. Forward-looking statements during this conference call speak only as of the original date of this call and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any of these statements. Discretions during the call will also include certain financial measures that were not prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted counting principles. Reconciliation of those non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures can be found in Pfizer's form 8k dated today, May 1st, 2018. Any non-GAAP measures presented are not and should not be viewed as substitutes for financial measures required by U.S. GAAP at most standardized meaning prescribed by U.S. GAAP and may not be comparable to the calculations of similar measures at other companies.

We will now make prepared remarks and then we will move to a question and answer session. With that, I'll now turn the call over to Ian Read. Ian?

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Chuck, and good morning everyone. During my remarks, I will discuss the progress and opportunities we are seeing across the business as well as the continuing strengthening of our R&D Pipeline, which we increasingly believe has the potential to drive significant future growth for Pfizer.

In the first quarter, total company revenues declined 2% operationally. This was due primarily to the loss of exclusivity of Viagra in the U.S. in December 2017. By a similar competition for Enbrel in Europe and product supply shortages related to our legacy Hospira products in the U.S. and our production facilities in Puerto Rico. These declines were partially offset by continued strong growth and emerging markets biosimilars globally and many of our anchor brands. I'll begin with a few words about each of our businesses starting with Pfizer innovative health. This business had another solid quarter growing as topline 3% operationally thanks to the continued strength of several of our biggest selling medicines.

The year over year growth rate of the innovate business was negatively impacted by approximately 1 percentage point due to the reclassification of U.S. Viagra sales to the Essential Health business following its lasting fusivity at the end of 2017. In addition, both Ibrance and Zellgen's revenues in the U.S. were impacted by custom of buying patent this quarter that we expect to remain on track for our four-year outlook for both products. In the first quarter, global Ibrance revenues were up 35% operationally to $933 million with non-U.S. revenues almost tripling. Ibrance continues to hold a leadership position in first line hormone receptive positive HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer. Since its launch, approximately 12,000 physicians have been prescribed Ibrance in the U.S. and more than 120,000 patients have been prescribed the medicine worldwide.

The overall CDK class continues to increase penetration within the eligible patient population and we now see approximately 70% of eligible patients receiving CDK therapy. Within the CDK category, Ibrance's again increased in share from 52% last quarter to 56% this quarter. Xtandi's U.S. alliance revenues were up 21% in the quarter to $159 million. In mid-March the U.S. FDA granted prior review for the SNDA for Xtandi in non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer with a PDUFA date in July 2018. In the E.U., the EMA has validated the type 2-variation submission for the same indication and began the new review process on March 5. Xeljanz revenues increased 29% operationally in the quarter to $326 million. We recently received two important rotary milestones for Xeljanz.

The FDA advisory committee recently gave us a favorable outcome for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis and this indication has a PDUFA date in June 2018. And just last week, the committee for medical products for human use of the European Medicines Agency adopted a positive opinion for Xeljanz five milligram twice daily in combination with methotrexate for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis. We believe the potential for Xeljanz in psoriatic arthritic, for which we've already received and FDA approval in December in ulcerative colitis, if approved, could be significant. Global Eliquis revenues were up 30% operationally in the quarter to $765 million. Eliquis is the #1 new to brand novel oral anticoagulant prescribed by cardiologists in 21 markets. In the U.S., it has a 52.1% of the total prescription share for novel oral anticoagulants -- ten percentage points ahead of our primary competitor, Xarelto.

Finally, we continue to review strategic options for our consumer healthcare business, which has delivered another solid quarter. We remain disciplined regarding our capital allocation and at this time we have not received an acceptable offer for the sale of this business. We will continue to manage this very strong business as we explore other alternatives, which could include everything from a full or partial separation of the business, to ultimately deciding to retain the business. We continue to expect to make a decision during 2018. I would like to take a moment to thank all of the consumer health colleagues who have worked so hard in the last quarter to produce a strong, focusing, growth rate.

Turning now to Pfizer Essential Health, while revenues for the quarter declined, due in large part to expected product LOE's and ongoing product supply shortages in the sterile injectable business, we once again saw strong operational growth both in emerging markets and in our biosimilars portfolio. Emerging markets for revenue within the Essential Health business grew 12% operationally for the quarter to nearly $2 billion. China led the way growing 26% operationally. Revenues from our biosimilars business grew 53% operationally in the quarter to $173 million. We expect to broaden our biosimilars portfolio in the U.S. by potentially bringing five biosimilars to the market in the next two years. Our steroid injectable shortages are primarily for products from the legacy Hospira portfolio. We expect our sterile injectable sales to be roughly flat year on year and this is incorporated into our financial guidance. We continue with our comprehensive remediation plan to upgrade and modernize these facilities and we expect additional capacity to be available in 2019. We continue to strengthen and advance our pipeline which today is as strong as it's ever been. Many touch on some of the more promising and recent developments.

In oncology, we have a broad range of tell good compounds that represent potential near-term opportunities. The phase three in BRCA trials show that our PARP inhibitor Talazoparib significantly extended progression-free survival versus tentative care chemotherapy in patients with BRCA-positive metastatic breast cancer. We're discussing the results with worldwide health authorities and anticipate filing this quarter. Lorlatinib was recently granted prior review by the U.S. FDA as a potential treatment for patients without positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with a PDUFA date in August of this year. Dacomitinib received the same designation in April for EGFR positive non-small cell lung cancer with a PDUFA date in September of this year with a potential to broaden our reached areas of lung cancer where there is great unmet need. In IO, we continue to progress on development program for Bavencio with our partner Merck KGaA, both in monotherapy and combinations with chemo and targeted Pfizer agents including Inlyta in first line advanced renal cell carcinoma and Talazoparib in multiple tumor types.

In information and immunology, we believe is a true leadership position of our JAK franchise. We recently started phase 3 trials of our once a daily JAK1 in atopic dermatitis. We currently have 10 ongoing selected immune kinase programs. In vaccines, the phase 3 study for our potential C. diff vaccine where we have the potential to be first in class has been rolling well, leveraging the success of Prevnar we're in phase 2 of our next-generation pneumococcal vaccine candidate with the potential to cover 20 serotypes. We expect to see the proof of concept data later in the year and expect to begin phase 3 in 2019. We're also are currently in phase 2 of our staphylococcus aureus vaccine and we are in discussions with the FDA regarding expanding the study to become a phase 3 pivotal study.

In rare diseases, we recently announced a positive phase 3 study readout for Tafamidis for the treatment of TTR cardiomyopathy lupine and we expect a phase 3 study readout for Rivipansel in sickle cell later in the year.

In gene therapy, we recently dosed our first patient using our investigational midi dystrophin gene therapy candidate for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy and all data for this trial are expected in the first half of 2019. In internal medicine, we expect a phase 3 readout for Tanezumab in osteoarthritis later in the year. If positive, this could be the first in a new class of non-opioid treatments for this disease.

Through 2022, we see the potential for approximately 25-30 approvals of which up to 15 have the potential to be blockbusters, sorry to some expected attrition. This presents an unprecedented opportunity to have a life-changing impact on a growing number of patients while creating an enhanced value for all our stakeholders. In summary, we continue to deliver on our strategy and believe we remain well positioned to deliver new medicines to patients and increase value for our investors going forward. Most of our anchor brands are primed for continuous growth. Our pipeline is as deep and focused as it's ever been. Our ownership culture remains a key differentiate force and our strong balance sheet and disciplined approach to capital allocation with ensure we have the resources to invest in future growth opportunities.

Looking ahead, we expect a dramatic reduction of LOE impacts following the upcoming Lyrica LOE in the U.S. will unencumber a potential revenue growth of our key drivers including the expected relation of our pipeline will allow us to achieve an infliction point in our topline growth profile. Coupled with continued strong expense management, we expect this will enable us to continually drive EPS growth at a rate that exceeds revenue growth. Now I will turn it over to Frank to invite details on the quarter and our outlook for 2018.

Frank D'Amelio -- Chief Financial Officer

Thanks, Ian. Good day, everyone. As always, the charts I'm reviewing today are included in our webcast. Now moving onto the financials. First quarter 2018 revenues were approximately $12.9 billion, which include the favorable impact of foreign exchange at $430 million partially offset by operational decline of $302 million.

Our innovative health business has recorded 3% operational revenue growth in the first quarter of 2018, driven primarily by Ibrance, Eloquis, and Xeljanz, which is partially offset by the loss of exclusivity of Viagra in the U.S. in December of 2017 and Enbrel in most developed Europe markets due to continued biosimilar competition.

It's important to note that Viagra revenues generated in the U.S. and Canada which were previously recorded in the innovative health business are now reported in our Essential Health business at the beginning of 2018. Revenues for our central health business in the first quarter decreased 9% operationally primarily due to a 15% operational decline in sterile injectables portfolio primarily due to continued legacy Hospira product shortages in the U.S. a 15% operational decrease from [inaudible] products primarily due to the expected declines of Lyrica in developed Europe and Prestiq in the U.S. all of which were partially offset by the inclusion of Viagra revenues in the U.S. 12% operational growth in emerging markets and 53% operational growth in biosimilars mainly driven by Inflectra in developed Europe as well as certain channels in the U.S. I want to point that in emerging markets, Pfizer's overall Essential Health revenues grew 12% operationally. First quarter, reported diluted EPS was $0.59 compared with $0.51 in the year ago quarter primarily due to a lower effective tax rate due to the enactment of the tax cuts and jobs act or the TCGA in late 2017 and higher other income due to increased income from collaborations, outlying arrangements, and sale of product rights, and unrealized net gains on equity securities reflecting the adoption of a new accounting standard first quarter of 2018, which were partially offset by lower revenues primarily in our Essential Health business.

First quarter reported fewer shares outstanding also favorably impacted diluted EPS. Adjusted diluted EPS for the first quarter was $0.77 versus $0.69 in the year ago quarter. The increase was primarily due to the previously mentioned factors. I want to point out the diluted weighted average shares outstanding declined by 35 million shares versus the year ago quarter due primarily to our share repurchase program reflecting the impact of our $5 billion accelerated share repurchase agreement executed in February of 2017 and completed in May of 2017 to a lesser extent by shares that were repurchased during first quarter 2018, partially offset by dilution related to share-based employee compensation programs.

As I previously mentioned, foreign exchange positively impacted first quarter 2018 revenues by approximately $430 million and negatively impacted adjusted cost of sales, adjusted SI&A expenses and adjusted R&D expenses in the aggregate by $349 million. As a result, foreign exchange favorably impacted the first quarter 2018 adjusted diluted EPS by approximately $0.01 versus the year ago quarter. As you can see, we reaffirmed all components of our full year 2018 financial guidance. Moving on to key takeaways, we delivered solid financial results in the first quarter of 2018 with a 12% increase in adjusted diluted EPS versus the prior year quarter. We reaffirmed all components of our 2018 financial guidance, we accomplished several key product and pipeline milestones, and we returned $8.1 billion to shareholders in the first quarter of 2018 through dividends and share repurchases.

Finally, we remain committed to delivering attractive shoulder returns in 2018 and beyond. Now I'll turn it back to Chuck.

Chuck Tirano -- Senior Vice President of Investor Relations

Thank you, Frank. Operator, can we please pull for questions? Thank you.

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen, if you will like to ask a question please press * then the number 1 on your telephone keypads. Your first question comes from Jami Rubin from Goldman Sachs.

Jami Rubin -- Goldman Sachs -- Analyst

Thank you. Ian this is for you as well as Frank. You've talked about an inflection point in growth post the Lyrica LOE I think starting after 2019. While I'm not asking you for specific guidance, can you give us a sense for the magnitude of that change? Are you talking about sales going from sort of flattish where they've been for quite some time to sort of mid-single-digit growth -- and earnings, which have been sort of mid-single-digit growth to, you know, where can that go? And Frank, assuming you don't do a large transaction, can you still drive bottom line leverage? Ian mentioned that you can, but your margins are already 40% -- can they get to 45% without a large deal? And then just lastly to you, Ian, every CEO before you has done a major transaction to accelerate revenue and earnings growth. Just curious, because your messaging has shifted a lot on a quarter-by-quarter basis, what will your legacy be before you retire? I mean, at one time you had said you aspired to get back to the innovative core and other times you've talked about wanting to do a large transaction so just was wondering if you could kinda share with us what you expect your legacy to be? Thanks very much.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Thank you for that. Let me first of all address the exciting growth question and then I'll come back to the more mundane facts of legacy. We continue to believe that the combination of our late-stage pipeline, as you mentioned the significant tapering of LOE's post the impact of Lyrica plus the growth drivers of our pipeline will give us a substantial inflection point I believe moving our growth rates and revenue to mid to high single digits -- and obviously our revenue being at least equal to that. If you look at our innovative health growth drivers today we have Ibrance, Xtandi, Xeljanz, Eliquis, and we're anticipating that those products continue to perform they have significant patent lives and they have [inaudible] extension of data we have coming on those products.

Our Essential Health business will expect to be growing at that period having passed through the major impacts of the LOE's we have our emerging market business we have our biosimilars business and plus we have our sterile injectables business which we think will put past us any of the issues of manufacturing from the Hospira parts. So, all in all, I'm really looking forward to the growth rates that we will produce and if you look over the four years we have projected the potential for approximately 20-30 approvals of which 15 have the potential to be blockbusters. I think we put out a list of those products. I don't want to extend the answer too far but it is an exciting list. We have, you know, in vaccines; clostridium difficile, we have Staphaurex, we have pneumococcal next-gen. In rare diseases, we have products in Duchennes. We have Rivipansel, we have Tafamidis, and [inaudible]. I probably think Tafamidis was the most risky of those alternatives and we are extremely pleased with the data from Tafamidis. Inflammation, we have JAK1, [inaudible], JAK3, type 2 JAK1, cell gens in osteoarthritis and ulcerative colitis. I think we have about 10 potential therapies in our JAK kinase franchise so I mean, really exciting stuff.

And oncology, we continue to look at targeted cancer agents, Ibrance into the high-risk breast cancer, Xtandi and non-metastatic, we've got Prosper and Barc and Archer so I think that is what will drive a really robust topline growth. Now turning to this issue of legacy, don't we think a lot about that? I think deals are done -- deals are done based on value shareholders. As you say, we've looked at different strategies over the years, our decision-making changes when the facts change. Right now, I think I would like to think that the legacy that when I do retire, that I will leave to patients and to Pfizer as that of an extremely robust pipeline that's beginning to deliver and a really strong culture of ownership and doing the right thing for patients. With that, I'll hand it over to Frank.

Frank D'Amelio -- Chief Financial Officer

And Jami, on operating leverage, let me just run some numbers for this year and then I'll answer the question. So, if you look at the midpoint of our revenue guidance for this year, if you look at the midpoint of our past guidance compare that to last year, revenue's up 4% EPS, adjusted EPS is up 11%. So, clearly, the ability to continue to demonstrate operating leverage in terms of revenue the topline to the bottom-line. Going forward, I would leave our margins where relatively where they are. If you look at our gross margin, look at operating margin, they're very strong. Top core quality industry. I think for modeling purposes, we'd leave them where they are.

Operator

Your next question comes from Tim Anderson from Bernstein.

Tim Anderson -- Bernstein -- Analysts

Thank you. If I could just go back to the pipeline in your level of excitement. You guys have a long list of products and it's almost a laundry list. Some of those invariably will be smaller, commercial opportunities like [inaudible], maybe [inaudible], maybe new ALK inhibitor. I'm hoping you can narrow the discussion down to maybe two or three of those products that you think will be the most commercially significant, why there's a future regret as you look forward over the next, call it 5 years? And second question, kinda bringing up this old topic of splitting up the company. You've talked about robustness in the business and how [inaudible] divisions' innovative and potential are increasingly better shape. I know some companies have further digested tax reform when a little split came out before and they've had a different view of what that means for them going forward. So, my question to you on this is, is there any possibility of reconsidering splitting up the company over the next few years? Thank you.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Tim, thank you for the question. I don't think it's a laundry list, I think all of those products you mentioned either individually or group like the target oncology therapies have potentials to be blockbusters. It's difficult to pick out one specific product but I would say when you look at the totality I would focus on our vaccine franchise, especially c. diff. I would look at the huge potential of Tafamidis, I would look at Tanezumab in pain and then frankly, I think the inflammation/immunology franchise taken as a whole is probably the best in the industry and we could get into all of the different indications and products there but if you look at the depth and strength of our science in that area, I'm really excited about our ability to drive mean for growth from that franchise. Vis-à-vis the tax law and the split potential, I'll ask Frank to make a few comments on that.

Frank D'Amelio -- Chief Financial Officer

Yeah, so on the tax law obviously we've had more time to digest and analyze the new tax laws, tax reform. And we're even more comfortable with the guidance we've provided for the year, which is approximately 17% on the tax rate. On the split, what we've said previously on optionality is that we were taking it off the table for the foreseeable future so from our perspective no change. We never say never to anything but right now for the foreseeable future we're all about executing other business.

Operator

The next question comes from Geoff Meacham from Barclays.

Geoff Meacham -- Barclays -- Analyst

Hey, guys, thanks for the question -- I just have a few. Ian, with the recent win for Tafamidis and the technology deals in a space, just wanted to see if rare disease is elevated at all in your strategic priority list. It's a good category, but Pfizer would have to add scale to have it really move the needle. And then just on the product side, just wonder if you guys have an update on the progress of expanding moving up stream to the end zero population. I know that was a big part of the original value proposition with the Medivation deal and just wanted to check on the progress thus far. Thank you.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Well thank you. I think we have critical mass in rare diseases. We've committed capital to that, we've committed capital to production, we have not only two possibilities in Duchennes, we have sickle cell, we have Tafamidis, we have Tanezumab, and we have gene therapy. I'm confident that we have the critical mass and if asked to become available it could be added to that as a bolt on that has significant value. We would act on that. But once again, we've always been I think very disciplined in our allocation and we haven't seen those opportunities as yet. I would ask Albert to talk about Xtandi and its movement into the other population.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

Absolutely, and also [inaudible] in the rare disease that it is multi-billion-dollar business right now. We've had four [inaudible] that they are in phase 3. We are expecting without as we speak cardiomyopathy, it is the one that Ian spoke but we've had also Rivipansel and with the gene therapy platform we're already in clinic three, different [inaudible] in [inaudible] A or [inaudible] B and the same [inaudible] report in [inaudible]. Now, let me speak about Xtandi, your question about earlier treatments. And we do believe that moving Xtandi into earlier treatment sentence represents a potential significant opportunity. In the short term, we are focused on the non-metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer indication, which is based on the positive results and filing [inaudible] that we go on the Prosper starting. As you know, we've had priority [inaudible] with a PDUFA date in July and hopefully we will see this medicine grow to the patients in any of term. Now with the medium term, how we breed growth, will potentially come from extending the Xtandi indication into hormone sensitive [inaudible]. we have the Ember trial but it is in non-metastatic hormone sensitive and we have the [inaudible] trial, which is in metastatic hormone sensitive. So, both [inaudible] are progressing very, very nicely. They are definitely on their timeline. And we are very optimistic about their success.

Operator

Our next question comes form Gregg Gilbert from Deutsche Bank.

Gregg Gilbert -- Deutsche Bank -- Analyst

Morning. First, Ian on consumer is timing is not right for whatever set of circumstances you can't get a fair price for consumer in the near term. How interested are you in doing something external to Pfizer like a spin or JD as opposed to retaining and likely needing to invest in it? And then perhaps Albert, you can talk about the competitive trek to the Prevnar franchise that you see from Merck. When could you get your next-gen Prevnar to market versus Merck's and what's next on the legal front? Thanks.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Gregg. On the consumer business, it's a good asset. We said we're looking at strategic alternatives to see if there's a better owner. As I commented, we don't at this moment see value in the sale. We'll focus on running the business. We had a very good quarter I'm very pleased with the way our consumer colleagues have reacted at working hard. We'll look during the year at our spends or drawn benches but you know, frankly, the business is a good business and if we can't get value, we'll retain it, we'll invest in it, and it continues to be important to us in that sense. Albert.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

From what we know, America's a pediatric program for a 50 [inaudible] pneumococcal vaccine in stage 2 and the adult program is awaiting [inaudible] like I said to Merck officials. Let me talk to you about our program. We have [inaudible] the [inaudible] with a next-generation [inaudible] pneumococcal vaccine and this is expected to include seven additional serotypes in addition to most covered by [inaudible]. All seven significantly improve the [inaudible] in the [inaudible] situations. Our result from phase 1 trial demonstrated that the vaccine was safe, that it was quite tolerable, but more importantly demonstrated the produced functional [inaudible] that could kill all 20 serotypes. So, these results supported advancement to phase two but was [inaudible] last year. Right now, it's fully enrolled. So, if everything goes as planned, we could start our phase 3 trials in the '19. [Inaudible] assuming regular [inaudible] success for both vaccines and the accounting for [inaudible] protection issues that we mentioned. But we would anticipate long [inaudible] in a competitive time frame to learn a much broader spectrum of coverage.

Operator

Your next question comes from Umer Raffat from Evercore.

Umer Raffat -- Evercore -- Analyst

Hi, thanks so much for taking my questions. I have two on R&D and one for Ian -- maybe starting out on R&D. On the [inaudible] though it's my understanding that the half-life is materially left on the competitor PD1, so about three days for [inaudible] it's about 14-21 days for competitors. However, the dosing frequency of [inaudible] is comparable to our people. So, my question is, just wanted to understand the thought process behind that dosing frequency given the half-life difference, as well as whether you think that's played any role in efficacy in some of the trials you've seen lately. Secondly, on Tafamadis, it can [inaudible] on the data and my question is: How do you see the competitive landscape versus Allatisram especially in light of the recent post talk in [inaudible] showed on cardiac outcomes in about a 45% reduction what they were seeing in the post talk bases. Finally, Ian, there's been some investor commentary lately on whether your recent comments on not looking for transformative [inaudible] is mainly aimed at controlling the price of the potential target. So, that it needs to value [inaudible] threshold when you do actually potentially revisit in 3-6 months, how do you react to that? Thank you.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Let me deal with that last question first. We continually look at all deals, as I said. We look for value for shareholders. I don't think we're that smart enough to be gaining anything to that extent. Frankly, I don't see that we need a transformative deal nor do I see one at appropriate values right now in the market place. We'll continue to use our capital wisely I believe at this moment in time -- although things can always change, market places can change. I believe the best investment we have now is in our own pipeline. So, with that, I'll turn it over to Mikael to answer the half-life question and then probably take the Tafamadis question as well as it's still in research phase.

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

Thank you for that. We need to get with our partner at Merck KGaA with us it's them showed pharma [inaudible] pharma [inaudible] studies are the current those ten [inaudible] intravenously every two weeks well should cover the [inaudible] target for blocking that receptor. You may have note to that we are also have an aspect that the antibody has ADCC which could be a unique property and we have one study that tried to address whether it can be a positive difference in property with an even more intense dosing regimen. Concerning [inaudible], we are as [inaudible] to extremely enthusiastic to share the positive results that was in a [inaudible] population. as you know, the endpoint was all cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalization. The study includes one type TTR and [inaudible] TTR. So, cardiomyopathy, it is to a major extent the [inaudible] type and to a minor extent, patients have an [inaudible]. So, this is quite different from other biotech companies using injectable that primarily were focused on putting neuropathy in. some of those for neuropathy patients that have the mutant form they also have later in life a cardiac's impulse. To the best of my knowledge, those were measured with more functional -- there were no hard endpoints related to cardiovascular hospitalization or even more of course, mortality related to cardiac patients. And finally, to the best of my knowledge, there are no clinical studies on one-type patients outside the [inaudible] which are again the major patients in the United States and the western world suffering from this difficult fatal disease. So, we believe we are, to the best of our knowledge, yes, ahead of everyone else to have such interesting data there. And we also believe it's a disease that is not well diagnosed and has substantial potential.

Operator

Your next question comes from Jason Gerberry from Bank of America.

Jason Gerberry -- Bank of America -- Analyst

Good morning, thanks for taking my question. Quick question on Ibrance as the share of growth shifts in the near to mediate serve to the ex-U.S. markets. Just wondering if you can kinda talk us through the progression in those markets of sales uptake given that you've now have reimbursement and you established and Japan's coming online so can you talk us through the progression there and do you think that ex-U.S. markets can ultimately one day be as big as the U.S.? And then just secondly, just on you [inaudible] understand there's still maybe a fair amount of free product on the channel -- so difficult to really gauge with the product at this point but could you provide a little bit of direction or commentary just around when we could start to see a bigger uptake in revenue generating scripts? Thanks.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Jason, I'll ask Albert to answer both of those good questions.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

Thank you, Jason, and I'm sure you've noticed we are very, very pleased with the progression of five brands in the international markets. We have very strong growth, it was in the excess of 170% of growth up sales almost three [inaudible]. Volume has been higher than that. As of December, Ibrance made up 98% of the total [inaudible] sold in the [inaudible]. Also, we did progress a lot with reimbursement. Right now, Ibrance is reimbursed in all of 85. Finally, and in Japan as you mentioned, and in total effect 25 markets like the Ibrance is reimbursed right now outside of the U.S. So, we expect to have significant progress and goal acceleration in that part of the world. Coming back to your question on the U.S., I think that first of all let me make some comments on the U.S. and then I will compare it with the European markets, the ex-U.S. sides of the markets. In the U.S., we have seen everything that we predicted. [inaudible] in the first language starts continue to steadily grow as we had predicted. It is now 69% from 58% at the end of last quarter. And Ibrance continues to hold the [inaudible] position in first line. Again, as we also had predicted it grew up, the markets are this quarter from 56% to 66% from 52%. In fact, the scripts grew much faster than the sales in the U.S. We have 26% growth of scripts, we have 19% growth of sales, and mainly the gap is attributable to situation of [inaudible] I think is going to be back to normal situation in the months ahead. And also I want to remember that the growth opportunities in the U.S. have not been exhausted by any means, right now in the U.S. -- why the CDK market of first line new patients to 69% for the syndicate. If you see it across all lines of treatment it is only 53%. So, we believe there is significant opportunity to grow the class. And of course, Ibrance is now more than 90% of the classes there right now. The size of it, too, I think that when it comes to utilization, penetration, and volume of patients, yes, the European markets will do as well if not better than the U.S. market. Of course, this is a very different price point that needs to be factor when we try to assess the total market.

Now, a few comments from Eucrisa: The prescriptions were 94,000 this quarter and that was a growth compared to previous quarter of 6%. However, it was slower growth than we had in the fourth quarter but it had all times pick up the growth we've had 55% growth in the fourth quarter of last year. This slow down in growth is attributable to the year beginning effort in which turn in the international market suppresses branded prescription demand as patient obtains their insurance plans -- this has been reported by other companies as well. And to give you a magnitude, we grew 6% while the total atopic dermatitis was flat. Right now, we are focusing our efforts in Eucrisa in two areas. One, to make sure that to broaden trial and adoption rates, a lot of dermatologists haven't chance to use steroids right now. And also: to improve access, and to have plans in place to do both.

Operator

Our next question comes from Andrew Baum from Citi.

Andrew Baum -- Citi -- Analyst

Thank you -- couple of questions. Firstly, to Ian and Frank on [inaudible] patient. Given that your collective reobservation is on some of your competitors' previous buyback acquisition together with your comments here in the past, the pipeline strength and its concept appreciation path, should we expect further additional buyback on top of what you've already [inaudible]. Second, on U.S. biosimilars and this [inaudible] to your [inaudible] product -- do you expect a significant increase in the adoption of biosimilars in the U.S. driven by insurers taking on board their biosimilars first given the pressure from the FDA, HHS, as well as the [inaudible]. And finally, for Mikael, should we expect an interim for the [inaudible] Ibrance 2019, anything?

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

So, on the biosimilars Andrew, we continue to make progress the U.S. with our own commercial efforts but I believe that it will take an effort by the administration to move that market given the substantial advantage the entrench companies have on the rebating system. So, I'm looking forward to doing some activity from the administration on that. But that being said, we continue to look for a good growth in that area and it'll certainly accelerate post the actual administration.

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

We expect the PALLAS trial for intermediate and high-risk breast cancer -- sorry, treatment to run until the primary completion date which is in 2020, that's efficient number of events. We remain very encouraged about the translation from metastatic to the breast cancer and have very much confidence in the strengths of Ibrance based on other neoadjuvant studies of the same type of tumor that has been positive.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

So, I would agree with you, Andrew, 100% that the pipeline is undervalued. I would ask Frank to make a quick comment on capital allocation.

Frank D'Amelio -- Chief Financial Officer

Yeah so on capital allocation, Andrew, our priorities haven't changed. They remain dividends, share buybacks, investing in the business, and M&A where it makes sense. Specific to buybacks to answer your question, in the first quarter we did $6.1 billion in share buybacks, an average price of $36.23. and just in terms of a little history, to go back to 2010, we've repurchased $61.7 billion worth of our shares, $2.2 billion shares retired, an average price of $27.35. This has been a very good trade. In terms of going forward, which is really what you asked me, we announce that $4 billion accelerated share repurchase on March 12th of this year, it'll take several months for that to complete. Once that completes, we'll assess where we are and then we'll make a decision on whether or not to do anything further on buybacks.

Operator

Your next question comes from David Risinger from Morgan Stanley.

David Risinger -- Morgan Stanley -- Analyst

Thanks very much. I just wanted to dig in a little bit deeper on the opportunity for Ibrance and early stage breast cancer. First, could you please discuss the NSABP's Ibrance PALLET trial? I understand that it's small, it's a neoadjuvant and it's 14 weeks but I was hoping that you could frame your expectations for that trial? And then Mikael, I know that you commented on Ibrance in the adjuvant setting in response to the prior question so if you could just comment about both of those trials, both PALLAS and PENELOPE-B and your level of confidence in success in late 2020?

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Albert: all yours.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

Thank you, first of all on the PALLAS study which we think it's run by a collaborative organization academic but we think it will read out relatively soon and be reported in the fold. I apply confidence that we will see a very robust single based on previous similar studies on neoadjuvant such as the study run by Washington University's a Dr. Marinellis that showed a very profound complete cell cycle arrest and also quite impressive complete responses in the neoadjuvant setting and it's a very similar patient population to the PALLET study that you referred to. And to study that primer endpoint they used a very same KI67 proliferation marker. So, I have a strong confidence in good outcome upon it based on previous ions and we think therefore that we should have a very optimistic view on PENELOPE and the PALLAS event driven adjuvant trials to hopefully for the benefit of patients, expand Ibrance into a population of other breast cancer that may be twice as big as the metastatic population. So, we look forward to see those studies conclude.

Operator

Your next question comes from Vlamil Devon [sic] from Credit Suisse.

Unknown Analyst -- Credit Suisse -- Analyst

Great, thanks so much for taking the questions. Just a couple questions, one on the innovative side with Xeljanz, the product was a little bit less than what we expected. I'm just wondering has this been any impact seen on that product given some of the concerns around [inaudible] disorders with [inaudible] review process and maybe you can also just frame what you see as the opportunity for you to see ahead of that action deed next month. And then on the biosimilar side: just a question on the biosimilar Remicade? I just know it did have a little bit of a decline sequentially from last quarter in developed Europe soon as due to competition but just wondering if you can give a little more clarity on what exactly is driving that and if it is competition, is it driven by Bioepis Samsung? Or is it driven more by the fact that Coltrane has other distributors selling the product as well? Thanks so much.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

Yes, Xeljanz's revenue were up this quarter, 30% in the U.S. particularly that we refer the growth was 19%. However, the scripts grew 33% so there is a sizable gap between the scripts and the sales and most of that is attributable, as with Eucrisna, in buying part, as I said those other companies report it. But the fact that this quarter already that this is normalized in the months after the quarter. So, there is no slow down on scripts as regard of any concern and as we have repeatedly said that we do not think that there is any correlation in Xeljanz with this type of side effects. Going to the UC it is as you know under registration the opportunity this allows the seven the market it is opportunity $5 billion affects approximately 1.8 million of people. We are very encouraged by the efficacy and safety results of Xeljanz in the OPAL study for psoriatic arthritis and OCTAVE studies for UC. We've had a very positive advisory committee; we have very positive interactions with defibrillators. And frankly, we expect that the product will be approved in the near future. I cannot comment on Remicade but ourselves, we grew 53% globally and 39%, that's just last year. We are very happy with how things are going in the international markets. Thankfully our research is in the U.S. where there's disproportionately smaller penetration than whatever is happening in the rest of the world because of some contracting practices.

Operator

Your next question comes from John Boris from SunTrust.

John Boris -- SunTrust -- Analyst

Thanks for taking the questions and congrats on your results. First one for both Ian and Mikael: If you look at your portfolio of assets and your pipeline, you certainly have the makings of a decent-sized orphan disease platform -- certainly the hemophilia franchise to your factor -- eight, nine businesses along with your gene therapy programs with spark along with Tafamidis and other assets seems as though that might be going toward a very important strategic area -- so Ian, just your thoughts around that? And the build out of that pipeline also Mikael?

Second question for Frank on other income with 250 in the quarter but your guiding to only 400 -- that seems to be a little low. What are some of the pushes and pulls there?

And then lastly, FE has been pretty vocal on advancing new policies to try and stimulate more biosimilar development with about a dozen policies that incrementally could move the ball in the direction to try and create more biosimilar competition yet what are some of the policies and procedures that you think could move the needle in favor of biosimilars going forward? And then, just any commentary on your accepting complete response whether and when you think you might resolve that? Thanks.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Thank you. Mikael, why don't you talk a little about our orphan disease portfolio? I believe we're investing in it I don't think there's any restrictions in our capital investment. If we see opportunities outside we'll take them but internally we have a lot of susceptible offer.

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

Yeah, basically we are focused on hemophilia, neuromuscular disease, and with some interest also in metabolic rare disease. Hemophilia's -- we have a long history and success and presence in the marketplace treating hemophilia A and B, we are very excited about our hemophilia B program that concluded successfully based on gene therapy successfully proof for concept and is progressing in partnership with Spark toward clinical studies. We have hemophilia A partnered with Sangamo where we make progress in those escalations. We also have a Pfizer monitored antibody against TFPI for weekly subcutaneous convenient delivery for all types of hemophilia where we have seen some early encouraging sign. So, we think it's a really interesting [inaudible]. On the neuromuscular disease side, Ian alluded that we started gene therapy for the shins and also the pivotal readout with a monitored L antibody against my [inaudible] if we look upon us high risk, high reward opportunity. And of course, within cardiomyopathy with Tafamidis we look very much forward to share the data and to swiftly advance the regulatory dialogues. And finally, end of the year with sickle cell disease another component of our hematology opportunity rare disease, we have also like the year of the end of the year readout for Rivipansel and we are look forward with encouragement based on that mechanist has played out well in the phase 2. As Ian alluded to, we think we are well resourced with all moralities in immunotherapy and end trend capability as well as non-immunotherapy moralities and we will continue to do internal as well as licensing flesh bolt on to accelerate.

Frank D'Amelio -- Chief Financial Officer

So, John, other income for the quarter was actually about a $320 million good guide income for the quarter -- so then that relative to the $400 million for the year -- really three major drivers there. One is we had some one-time milestone payments to the tune of about $115 million. we had $110 million in unrealized gains on equity securities and we don't try to project those and those could turn one way or the other going forward. And then the third big-ticket item is net interest expense. Interest income for the quarter about $75 million, interest expense about $315 million. You net that out about $240 million per quarter, and that interest expense going forward for the remainder of the year. We put that together, we think it's prudent to leave the other income in approximately $400 million.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

Yes. Let me start -- first the one will be around the policy of biosimilars. Look, I've been encouraged by the words of the FDA and other people in Trump's administration we talk right now to translate these words into tangible actions but can reverse the situation. Keep in mind that the biosimilars penetration -- let's take Inflectra -- in Europe it's 56%, in the U.S. I'll say it's 6% so there is something wrong with that. (But not in closed systems.) Actually, thank you for raising that. We've seen both systems, we have 66% in this quarter. Half of our sales are coming in closed systems. Closed systems meaning when the provider is the same [inaudible] who do the payer. And when it comes to value, we always win. And this is what we want to see that prevails. Now, back to your question about [inaudible]. We did receive and expected the action, a complete response letter from the FDA. President FDA was asking additional technical information verification. We didn't think that something like that could come to complete response letter. I want to clarify that those questions were not related either to safety nor to clinical data submitted and they have nothing to do with pertaining to manufacturing abilities. Nevertheless, this time we do not anticipate that the FDA action will have any impact on our plans to launch of our [inaudible] we think that we will be able to respond to these queries and get it approved before our predicted [inaudible].

Operator

Your next question comes from Chris Schott from J.P. Morgan.

Chris Schott -- J.P. Morgan -- Analyst

Thanks very much for the questions -- just two here, first on the Essential Health business. Could we just get a little bit more color on the legacy Hospira shortages? I believe you said you expect the injectable business to be flat year-over-year but there are two un-results still showing some erosion. Could we just talk a little bit about how you see these issues resolving, how quickly you think you can recapture share once you're back at normalized capacity? And the second question was on Tafamadis. Can you just comment on the size of the cardiomyopathy patient population you're gonna be pursuing? And do you believe the ATTR-ACT data suggests a potential for this product in pulling neuropathy? And if so, do you have to run additional studies there or can you refile in that setting? Thanks very much.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Albert, why don't you handle those questions and ask Mikael to comment as you see fit?

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

Thank you very much. B8 a general comment as we've all -- the business decline 9%, but here you see the legacy Pfizer the decline was only 2% despite the loss of exclusivities. Most of the decline came from Hospira, a legacy 38% partly because of the divestment of the device business but also because of supplies that we fail with our sterile injectables. We do believe that the revenues from this portfolio roughly will be flat this year compared to last year. I think that we had the decline this quarter for like we'll see decline this quarter as well, and then we will see growth in the third and fourth quarters so overall will be roughly flat. We anticipate it -- this situation -- and to have incorporated it into the guidance that Frank provided the beginning of the year. And we continue our very comprehensive radiation plants to upgrade and modernize these facilities in Hospira.

We are in constant contact with the FDA and we have increased substantially our investments including these manufacturing sites. So, we believe that, as I said, we will be flat and then next year we will start providing much more capacity available that we do not have now. As regards to Tafamadis, let me make a comment on the market opportunity and I will ask Mikael to help into the more scientific question. The TTR cardiomyopathy is a rare progressive disease. And it is a fatal disease. People that are diagnosed with the disease they have a life expectancy of 3-7 years unfortunately. It is almost like, unfortunately, a death sentence. The prevalence of the disease is currently unknown but it is expected that less than 1% of the people are diagnosed in the U.S. and already this number is several thousand. So, we believe that by working toward improving awareness and diagnostic rate to this disease we will be able to provide meaningful assistance to those people that they have naturally no options. Mikael?

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

Thank you, that was a terrific background of the disease. I can only build on what Albert said. Data suggests the disease is vastly under-diagnosed and we have seen some recent external figures estimating that just in U.S. it may be more than 100,000 patients related to TTR cardiomyopathy. This is likely driven by the white type, the semi-systemic amyloidosis caused by the white type as it increases dramatically as a contributed to cardiomyopathy we're growing age in an aging population and now with the increasing availability of diagnostic tools, and of course availability of drugs potentially pending regulatory dialogues a drug like Tafamadis there would be a large incentive to do more early diagnoses that will allow patients to achieve it for longer time before it progress and have these dire prognoses that Albert alluded to. There's also the mutant form that can be diagnosed very easily and earlier in life but we do think there are opportunities to also diagnose white type in a more efficient manner. So, that's why we're excited about this -- having this large data set on white type TTR cardiomyopathy -- and we look forward to the dialogues would regulate this, and potentially how to contribute to early diagnoses awareness of the disease to help patients.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

And the population for start Mikael included both types, right?

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

It does. Of course, initially in a patient group accessible will be mainly with academic medical centers, which is a fraction of the number I shared but as awareness grows the disease will have been likely diagnosed at many cardiology clinics.

Operator

Your next question comes from Steve Scala from Cowen.

Steve Scala -- Cowen -- Analyst

Thank you. Ibrance Q1 E.U. sales were flat with that in 2-3 of '17. Given the negative sales in 2-4, I would've expected a nice recovery, so can you speak to that specifically? And is price the explanation for this disparity? Second, what were Ibrance and Xeljanz stocking numbers in Q1? And then lastly onto Tafamadis, sorry to ask again but just to clarify prior answers. Based on the data you have and the data you'll present this year, can you get a broad label for patients with predominantly neurological manifestation and a broad label covering a range of disease severities? It sounds like the answer is yes on both but please just confirm. Thank you very much.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

Mikael could you give a brief comment on the potential avenues for diagnosis and labeling?

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

We certainly believe on the comprehensive data that we have an opportunity to discuss a broad label for cardiomyopathy. Concerning neuropathy, we do have earlier trials, smaller in nature, but it was efficient for registration in Europe. And we do have registered data of many patients in Europe that they're doing very well on Tafamadis. And we will look at opportunity in dialogues with various divisions at FDA for an opportunity that would cover multiple patient populations, as you alluded to.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

On the Ibrance question, when you are in the phase of looking for listings in Europe, it's very difficult to get a read on the total value of the products as very often you sell under emergency protocols at a price that is not necessarily relevant to the final price you gave or to the U.S. price for that matter. So, we see very robust uptake with position to Ibrance and we see an impact of course on the revenue as we adjust to the reimbursement levels of Ibrance that will give us sustained and a growing opportunity for substantial patient number increase in Europe. So, I think this is apart of what we do and when we negotiate pro-access and we feel we have a very strong strategy around access and future growth in Europe. Albert, do you want to add anything to the questions?

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

I just -- you said it very well and we're feeling that the prices that we both represent good buying in the air can align with what usually products are priced here.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

And the inventory levels of the movement -- it's very difficult for us to measure that because a lot of it's specialty and we don't have a very strong control over where is in with the distributors in general. We know very well what inventory levels are so by deduction we know that the scripts were up, we know where the revenue was, we know that we don't believe it's a net pricing effect, so by difference it has to be inventory movements.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

And just led by our calculations reveal about the most of the [inaudible] is because of inventory [inaudible].

Operator

Your next question comes from Alex Arfaei from BMO.

Alex Arfaei -- BMO -- Analyst

Hey, good morning folks, thank you for taking the questions. First from Xeljanz -- roughly what proportion of Xeljanz in the U.S. is coming from TNF [inaudible] patients as opposed to TNF Experienced and a follow-up on biosimilars? It appears that the Europeans are becoming more aggressing in their adoption of biosimilars, wondering if I could get your thoughts there? And could you comment on the implications of that -- both on the headwind for Xeljanz and the tailwind for your biosimilars pipeline? Specifically, would you be able to provide us an extensive launch timeframe for some of the key biosimilar products in Europe? Thank you.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

On the Xeljanz question, we estimate that more than 50% of our patients comes from male patients.

Ian Read -- Chief Executive Officer

And the other question I think, the Xeljanz opportunities in Europe are just beginning. It's in the actual usage of the product -- it's not the majority is naïve to TNF's because the growth of the marketplace itself is slow so it has to be people who can go over from TNF to using Xeljanz. The important thing with Xeljanz is that it's a lot of use, it's a lot of therapy, which we think allows us the distinguish of cells from the TNX as they go off patent. So, I see a very aggressive growth rate for Xeljanz in Europe and a very aggressive growth rate for biosimilars as well.

Operator

Your next question comes from Tony Butler from Guggenheim Partners.

Tony Butler -- Guggenheim Partners -- Analyst

Thanks very much -- two brief questions. Mikael, given the outcome of the Javelin lung study, what's the position that you feel Pfizer will be in relative to lung as a histology for the [inaudible] or any other combination and/or combinations moving forward? And then second to that, does that actually change or does the outcome actually change your strategy or the focus from one of identifying patients who may respond to a particular IO monotherapy or simply combinations for every body? Is that strategy -- is there a difference that may occur perhaps as a result of Javelin lung? Thanks.

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

We've always been focusing on combinations as the way to go over the longer term and over the next 18 months we had 60 with the readouts because type tumor types or which type of them are combinations and only one is monotherapy -- the first line lung, including first and second line with GMO renal with in light as a targeted therapy. Gastric, with Prevencia's maintenance of the chemo, bladder with Prevencia's maintenance of the chemo, and the first line lung was designed very differently from the second line, it contains hierarchical readout for high PDL1 and intermediate PDN1 and combined and point for [inaudible] survivors so I think we will be able to mitigate an impact, a crossover, from control group to either mock the DD agent that we recorded in the second line earlier, so we feel pretty good about this cohort of readouts in the next 18 months and of course many earlier are clinic studies that were not [inaudible] but we again rate a good combination I thought.

Operator

Your final question comes from Marc Goodman from UBS.

Marc Goodman -- UBS -- Analyst

Just a continuation on the IO I was curious your thoughts, Mikael, about CNB as the biomarker, how much development work you think should be put into that? And just on Prevnar just in the U.S., can you give us a little color on what's going on and how you think about the growth there? Thanks.

Mikael Dolsten -- President of Worldwide Research and Development

Concerning CNB, we think it's interesting to explore additional biomarkers beyond Peden 1. To the best of my knowledge, I think Peden 1 is the biomarker right now that has solid data concerning those [inaudible] and overall survival, while team B is at this stage mainly reported [inaudible] and far less OS data. So, I think we need more time to understand how team B would fit into it but obviously we think it's the way to go to have numerous ways to analyze high responders but I was [inaudible] the as I said previously, will be utilize those information pieces with right combinations.

Albert Bourla -- Chief Operating Officer

Yes, on the Prevnar. I want to say that the overall sales were slightly declined 3% and as you mention, U.S. was the main driver of the decline with 12% but by I want also to emphasize that it can grow in emerging markets with 45% growth and this is due to multiple factors but the most important is we just launched in China where we expect that we will have very good update. Now, the specific information that you ask for the U.S -- in the U.S. we have 12% decline and this is a combination of both, adult and pediatric. Pediatric actually declined for 3% but that was [inaudible] this is common CDC when you have big governmental purchases they can happen one month then the other and that benefactor grow. So, we think that the pediatric U.S. will grow actually for the year. And the U.S. adult declined by 7%. Actually, I think it was rather positive the fact that now we are slowing down the decline since we are coming more to a steady state of the adult penetrations.

Operator

Ladies and gentleman, this concludes Pfizer's first quarter 2018 earnings conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.

 

Duration: 76 minutes

Call participants:

Jami Rubin -- Goldman Sachs -- Analyst

Tim Anderson -- Bernstein -- Analysts

Geoff Meacham -- Barclays -- Analyst

Umer Raffat -- Evercore -- Analyst

Jason Gerberry -- Bank of America -- Analyst

Andrew Baum -- Citi -- Analyst

David Risinger -- Morgan Stanley -- Analyst

Unknown Analyst -- Credit Suisse -- Analyst

John Boris -- SunTrust -- Analyst

Chris Schott -- J.P. Morgan -- Analyst

Steve Scala -- Cowen -- Analyst

Alex Arfaei -- BMO -- Analyst

Tony Butler -- Guggenheim Partners -- Analyst

Marc Goodman -- UBS -- Analyst

More PFE analysis

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.