NEW YORK, October 15, 2025 — Pfizer Chief Executive Officer Albert Bourla has urged the U.S. pharmaceutical industry to deepen collaboration with China’s fast-growing biopharma sector, highlighting China’s rapid ascent as a global leader in drug discovery and development. Speaking at the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations Gala in New York on Tuesday, Bourla emphasized that China’s remarkable speed, cost efficiency, and scale are reshaping the global competitive landscape in life sciences.
“In biopharma, China’s dramatic speed, cost, and scale have triggered a shift in the global competitive landscape,” Bourla said. “To remain competitive and innovative, the U.S. industry must engage more closely with China’s pharmaceutical ecosystem.”
China’s Rise in Global Drug Development
Over the past decade, China has transformed itself from a secondary player to a global powerhouse in biopharmaceutical innovation, now responsible for 30% of global drug development activity, according to Bourla.
Ten years ago, China had only about 60 novel drug candidates in development. Today, that number has skyrocketed to more than 1,200, reflecting a dramatic surge in scientific research, regulatory reform, and investment in biotechnology.
The rapid approval processes and large patient pools in China have allowed the country to conduct clinical trials two to five times faster than in the United States, making it an increasingly attractive partner for multinational pharmaceutical companies.
U.S.-China Tensions and Trade Challenges
Bourla’s remarks come amid heightened economic and trade tensions between Washington and Beijing, as President Donald Trump’s administration continues to pursue an aggressive trade policy aimed at narrowing the U.S. trade deficit and countering China’s growing influence in strategic industries.
Trump has imposed tariffs on billions of dollars of Chinese imports, including pharmaceuticals and medical equipment, arguing that such measures will restore U.S. manufacturing and disrupt illicit drug flows, including fentanyl trafficking.
In addition, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill in 2024 designed to restrict business partnerships with Chinese pharmaceutical companies, citing national security and supply chain risks. Although the legislation failed to pass the Senate, a revised version has been reintroduced in 2025, reflecting continued bipartisan scrutiny of U.S.-China cooperation in biotech.
Despite these political headwinds, major Western pharmaceutical companies continue to forge strategic partnerships with Chinese biotech firms to access innovation, lower development costs, and expand their global reach.
Pfizer’s Strategic Partnership with China’s 3SBio
Earlier in 2025, Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) deepened its engagement in the Chinese market by striking a landmark licensing deal with 3SBio Inc. (1530.HK), one of China’s leading biotechnology companies. The agreement grants Pfizer access to an experimental cancer therapy, with a $1.25 billion upfront payment and potential milestone payouts of up to $4.8 billion if development goals are achieved.
The deal is one of several recent examples of cross-border pharmaceutical collaboration that underscore China’s rising importance as a hub of biomedical innovation.
“Chinese biotech firms accounted for nearly one-third of all large pharma drug licensing deals last year,” Bourla noted. “This marks a fundamental shift in where innovation is being sourced globally.”
Pfizer’s move mirrors similar partnerships by other Western drugmakers, including AstraZeneca, Roche, and Johnson & Johnson, all of which have expanded R&D operations and venture investments in China to tap into the country’s fast-growing scientific ecosystem.
The Case for Collaboration Over Competition
Bourla emphasized that cooperation—not isolation—is key to sustaining innovation in the biopharmaceutical industry. While geopolitical tensions continue to influence trade and technology policies, he argued that science transcends politics and that collaboration between the U.S. and China could accelerate global health breakthroughs.
“We cannot solve the world’s greatest health challenges alone,” Bourla said. “Partnerships between leading U.S. and Chinese research institutions and companies are essential to advancing innovation, curing diseases, and improving global health.”
Industry experts agree that China’s clinical trial capabilities, regulatory efficiency, and cost advantages provide compelling incentives for Western companies to engage. However, they also caution that intellectual property protection, data sharing, and political risks remain major hurdles.
A Shifting Global Pharmaceutical Landscape
The global biopharmaceutical industry is undergoing a profound transformation, driven by advances in artificial intelligence, genetic therapies, and biologics manufacturing. As innovation accelerates, competition for market share and research talent has intensified.
China’s state-backed investment in biotech innovation—including government funding for R&D, new talent programs, and cutting-edge research parks—has positioned it as a critical player in the next era of pharmaceutical development.
Meanwhile, U.S. pharmaceutical giants face rising costs, longer regulatory timelines, and tightening profit margins, leading many to explore global partnerships as a way to diversify research pipelines and share risk.
The Road Ahead: Balancing Risk and Opportunity
While calls for decoupling persist in Washington, business leaders like Bourla are urging a balanced approach that recognizes both national security concerns and the global nature of medical innovation.
Analysts suggest that a pragmatic model of selective cooperation—focusing on non-sensitive research areas such as oncology, chronic disease management, and clinical trial acceleration—could benefit both sides without compromising U.S. strategic interests.
As Bourla concluded at the Gala:
“The future of medicine will be written by those who collaborate. Whether in Boston or Beijing, innovation knows no borders—and neither should our commitment to saving lives.”
Leave a Reply