As Asia-Pacific bears nearly half of the global cancer burden, precision medicine is emerging not only as a clinical breakthrough but also as a powerful economic driver. In this exclusive BioPharma APAC exchange, Stephanie Newey, Managing Partner and Head of L.E.K. Consulting Australia, shares new insights from the firm’s recent modelling that projects a staggering USD 1.615 trillion in indirect economic impact across Japan, China, Australia, and South Korea. From CAR-T therapies to digital health analytics and cold-chain logistics, the ripple effects extend far beyond pharma. But realising this opportunity will require urgent reforms—from workforce readiness and regulatory clarity to public-private collaboration on equitable access.

The report estimates a USD 1.615 trillion indirect economic impact across Japan, Australia, China, and South Korea. Can you explain how this multiplier effect plays out across adjacent industries, and what sectors are expected to see the most benefit?

Multiplier effects describe how an initial injection of investment into an economy can lead to a larger increase in economic output and employment, as the initial impact ripples through different sectors and stimulates additional economic activity. 

Our modelling shows that an initial wave of investment in precision therapies is likely to cascade through the wider economy, generating ~USD 1.6 trillion in additional output across Australia, China, Japan, and South Korea over the coming decade. Those gains do not sit inside pharma alone. Advanced biologics and vector manufacturing; high-throughput diagnostics; cold-chain and logistics; digital health analytics and professional services, such as clinical research and nursing, all expand as the initial spend ‘ripples’ through the wider pharmaceutical, medical device, and diagnostic supply chains.

Precision therapies are positioned as game changers for rare and hard-to-treat diseases. What specific innovations or platforms do you see as leading this shift, particularly within the Asia-Pacific region?

The key innovations or platforms we see leading the shift are cell therapies, gene therapies, targeted antibody therapies, drug-device combination therapies, and diagnostic technologies. These platforms were selected for their relevance as precision therapies, due to their ability to deliver more tailored diagnosis and treatment, and their demonstrable impact on treating these rare and hard-to-treat diseases. There are over 4,000 of these precision therapies expected over the next few years that will deliver a step-change in treatment options for patients.

One example of these precision therapies is CAR-T technology (chimeric antigen receptor T-Cell), a notable development in cell therapies, which uses engineered immune cells from a patient to target and destroy tumour cells, in particular blood cancers, such as multiple myeloma and lymphoma. 

With over 1.2 million highly skilled jobs expected to be created, what are the skillsets and talent gaps that governments and academic institutions must prioritise to capture this opportunity?

          Whilst we have not conducted a comprehensive analysis of the skills and talent gaps that need to be addressed in this work, governments and academic institutions will need to prioritise the following broad categories:

• Clinicians (specialists and GPs) with the requisite knowledge of precision therapies, enabling them to effectively discuss appropriate treatment and care options with their patients. 
• Oncology nurses with knowledge of the patient care needs and protocols associated with precision therapies, in order to deliver the best care for patients.
• Clinical research associates and clinical trial coordinators, who play a critical role in supporting the development and eventual commercialisation of these precision therapies 

In the context of Asia carrying nearly 50% of the global cancer burden, what health system reforms or policy changes are needed to make these new therapies accessible and affordable at scale?

Asia carries almost half of the world’s cancer burden, so reforms must focus on both capacity and equity. Solutions vary between the four markets, but the three key priorities are: 

• Establishing streamlined, fit-for purpose regulatory and reimbursement pathways specifically tailored to precision therapies. 
• Increasing education for providers, patients, and the community to enhance understanding of precision therapies. 
• Enhancing public-private collaboration to foster innovation and equitable access to precision therapies. 

The economic case for precision therapies is robust—but what are the regulatory or reimbursement bottlenecks still holding back adoption across the four focus markets?

We think there are three main barriers that extend beyond just regulatory or reimbursement challenges. These are:

• A lack of a clear, fit-for-purpose regulatory and reimbursement pathways to properly evaluate precision therapies. This causes delayed access to therapies and lower reimbursement for novel therapies, resulting in higher out of pocket costs and affordability constraints.  
• Low patient and healthcare provider awareness of these novel therapies and the benefits they offer. This causes potential delays and misdiagnosis, reluctance by treating physicians to prescribe novel therapies, and difficulty accessing the treatments.  
• A need for healthcare infrastructure and investment to support access to these medicines, including volume of and access to clinical trials, information about novel therapies, leveraging genomic data for research and development, and supporting innovation in precision medicine development. 

The biggest regulatory / reimbursement-related drag on uptake remains fragmented, sequential regulatory reviews and HTA frameworks that undervalue long-term societal gains. Add to this the limited reimbursement for companion diagnostics and we have a perfect storm where transformative therapies are approved slowly, funded late, and used sparingly despite their compelling economics.