혈액암 시장 : 세계 예측(2026-2032년)

The Hematological Malignancies Market is projected to grow by USD 130.91 billion at a CAGR of 8.36% by 2032.

Hematological Malignancies Executive Summary

Hematological malignancies, including leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, myelodysplastic syndromes, myeloproliferative neoplasms, and related plasma cell and lymphoid neoplasms, remain a high-priority oncology area because they combine significant disease burden with rapid scientific progress. Rising diagnostic precision, broader genomic profiling, improved measurable residual disease monitoring, and expanding access to immunotherapies are reshaping how clinicians classify risk, select treatment pathways, and evaluate long-term response. The field is increasingly defined by earlier molecular characterization, treatment personalization, and multidisciplinary care models that integrate hematology, pathology, radiology, transplant medicine, infectious disease, and supportive care.

Clinical decision-making is shifting from histology-led approaches toward biomarker-informed strategies across acute leukemias, chronic leukemias, aggressive and indolent lymphomas, and myeloma. Measurable residual disease assessment, next-generation sequencing, flow cytometry, cytogenetics, and immune phenotyping are increasingly central to treatment selection and relapse surveillance. At the same time, real-world evidence, patient-reported outcomes, and survivorship data are gaining importance as health systems seek to improve outcomes while managing toxicity, access, and care continuity.

The clinical landscape is also being influenced by advanced therapies such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, bispecific antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, targeted kinase inhibitors, BCL-2 inhibitors, proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, epigenetic therapies, and stem cell transplantation. These innovations are improving therapeutic options for relapsed, refractory, and high-risk disease, while creating operational demands around specialized infrastructure, treatment sequencing, adverse event management, and equitable access.

Transformative Shifts in the Hematological Malignancies Landscape

The hematological malignancies landscape is undergoing transformative change as precision oncology becomes embedded in routine care. A major shift is the movement from uniform chemotherapy-based regimens toward molecularly guided treatment algorithms that account for genetic mutations, cytogenetic risk, immune markers, comorbidities, frailty, and prior therapy exposure. This is particularly visible in acute myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, and multiple myeloma, where treatment pathways increasingly depend on disease biology rather than diagnosis alone.

Cellular and immune-based therapies are redefining expectations for heavily pretreated patients. CAR-T cell therapy has demonstrated durable responses in selected B-cell malignancies and myeloma, while bispecific antibodies are expanding off-the-shelf immune redirection strategies. These modalities are prompting health systems to build capabilities in leukapheresis coordination, cell processing logistics, cytokine release syndrome management, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity monitoring, and post-treatment surveillance. As use expands beyond academic centers, standardized referral pathways and toxicity management protocols are becoming critical.

Another major shift is the growing use of measurable residual disease as a response metric. MRD testing supports risk-adapted therapy, early relapse detection, and more refined evaluation of treatment depth. In parallel, survivorship and quality-of-life considerations are becoming more prominent because many hematological malignancies are now managed as chronic or relapsing diseases. This has increased attention on infection prevention, vaccination, fertility preservation, cardiovascular risk, secondary malignancies, financial toxicity, and psychosocial support.

Digital health, decentralized diagnostics, and integrated data systems are also transforming care delivery. Telehematology, remote monitoring, digital pathology, and interoperable oncology records are helping improve continuity for patients who require long-term follow-up. However, disparities in access to molecular diagnostics, specialist centers, transplant services, and advanced therapies continue to shape outcomes across regions and health systems.

Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Hematological Malignancies

Artificial intelligence is beginning to exert a cumulative impact across the hematological malignancies continuum, from early detection and diagnostic classification to treatment selection, trial matching, and long-term monitoring. In pathology, AI-enabled image analysis can support recognition of abnormal cell morphology, bone marrow patterns, lymph node architecture, and immunohistochemistry features, helping improve diagnostic consistency when used alongside expert review. In radiology, machine learning can assist in lesion assessment, treatment response evaluation, and radiomics-based risk characterization, particularly for lymphoma and myeloma imaging.

AI is also strengthening genomic interpretation by helping prioritize clinically relevant variants, integrate cytogenetic and molecular findings, and identify patterns associated with treatment resistance or relapse. In leukemias and myeloid neoplasms, algorithmic tools can support risk stratification by combining mutation profiles, laboratory parameters, patient characteristics, and treatment history. In lymphoid malignancies and myeloma, AI-supported analytics can help synthesize complex data from flow cytometry, sequencing, serum markers, imaging, and clinical records.

Clinical operations are another area of growing impact. AI can improve eligibility screening for clinical trials, predict risk of hospitalization or treatment-related complications, optimize transfusion and supportive care planning, and flag patients who may benefit from specialist referral. Natural language processing can extract information from pathology reports, physician notes, and molecular test results to improve registry quality and real-world evidence generation.

The adoption of AI in hematological malignancies depends on transparent validation, data representativeness, regulatory compliance, cybersecurity, clinical workflow integration, and clinician trust. Bias mitigation is essential because models trained on limited datasets may underperform across age groups, ethnic populations, rare disease subtypes, and resource-constrained settings. The greatest value is expected from human-in-the-loop systems that enhance clinical decision support without replacing hematologist expertise.

Key Regional Insights Across Hematological Malignancies

Asia-Pacific is characterized by a large and diverse hematological malignancy burden, with growing diagnostic capacity in major urban centers and persistent access gaps in rural and lower-resource settings. Countries across the region are expanding oncology infrastructure, molecular testing, stem cell transplantation programs, and specialist hematology networks. Japan, South Korea, Australia, China, and India are notable for increasingly advanced clinical research activity, broader use of targeted therapies, and growing experience with cellular therapies, although reimbursement pathways and treatment availability vary substantially.

Europe demonstrates mature hematological malignancy care across many countries, with robust clinical guidelines, cancer registries, cooperative research networks, and access to specialized hematology services. The European Union supports cross-border collaboration in rare cancers, regulatory harmonization, pharmacovigilance, and health technology assessment, while national reimbursement differences influence therapy adoption. Western Europe generally has broader access to advanced therapies and molecular diagnostics, whereas parts of Eastern Europe continue to face infrastructure and funding constraints.

North America remains a highly advanced region for hematological malignancy care, supported by established cancer registries, extensive clinical trial networks, specialized transplant and cellular therapy centers, and broad adoption of molecular diagnostics. The United States and Canada have strong capabilities in leukemia, lymphoma, and myeloma management, including immunotherapy delivery and MRD testing. However, disparities persist across insurance coverage, geography, race, ethnicity, age, and access to tertiary cancer centers, making equitable implementation a central policy and clinical priority.

Latin America continues to strengthen hematology-oncology services through investments in cancer centers, professional training, and diagnostic modernization. Brazil and Mexico serve as important regional hubs, while access to advanced diagnostics, transplantation, and novel therapies remains uneven across public and private systems. The region's priorities include earlier diagnosis, improved referral pathways, stronger laboratory quality systems, and expanded access to essential oncology medicines and supportive care.

Africa faces the most significant access barriers, including limited pathology capacity, insufficient molecular diagnostics, shortages of oncology specialists, constrained availability of chemotherapy and supportive care, and late-stage presentation. Nonetheless, several countries are building cancer centers, improving hematopathology training, and expanding partnerships focused on diagnosis and treatment access. Strengthening laboratory infrastructure, blood services, infection control, palliative care, and referral systems is essential for improving hematological malignancy outcomes across the continent.

The Middle East is advancing hematological malignancy care through investment in tertiary hospitals, transplant programs, genomic medicine initiatives, and specialist oncology services. Gulf countries are expanding high-complexity care and attracting specialized expertise, while other parts of the region continue to contend with variable access, workforce shortages, and treatment affordability challenges. Consanguinity patterns, inherited predisposition research, and national cancer registry development are also relevant to regional hematology and oncology planning.

Key Group Insights Across Hematological Malignancies

NATO member countries include several of the world's most developed hematology-oncology systems as well as countries with evolving cancer infrastructure. Across the group, preparedness, medical logistics, blood supply resilience, infection prevention, and cross-border health security have relevance for hematological malignancy patients, who are often immunocompromised and dependent on continuous care. Collaboration in research, registry development, and emergency continuity planning can strengthen outcomes for patients requiring complex and uninterrupted treatment.

The G7 has strong institutional capacity in hematological malignancies, including advanced diagnostics, robust regulatory systems, clinical trial infrastructure, transplant programs, and increasing use of immunotherapies. The group is influential in setting clinical standards, safety monitoring practices, and evidence generation models. Despite advanced capabilities, G7 health systems continue to address challenges related to treatment cost, aging populations, workforce capacity, rural access, and equitable delivery of highly specialized therapies.

BRICS countries collectively represent a major portion of the global hematological malignancy patient population and show substantial variation in healthcare capacity. Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are expanding cancer infrastructure, clinical research participation, and domestic diagnostic capabilities. Their shared priorities include improving affordability, increasing specialist training, strengthening laboratory accreditation, expanding access to advanced therapies, and building real-world datasets that reflect diverse populations and treatment settings.

The European Union plays a central role in harmonizing evidence-based hematological malignancy care through regulatory coordination, rare cancer collaboration, clinical research networks, pharmacovigilance systems, and health data initiatives. EU countries benefit from shared scientific standards and multicenter study participation, although access to novel therapies and molecular diagnostics differs by national reimbursement decisions and healthcare budgets. Continued emphasis on real-world evidence, health technology assessment, and cross-border reference networks supports improved care for rare and complex blood cancers.

ASEAN presents a heterogeneous hematological malignancies environment shaped by rapidly growing urban cancer centers, expanding public health coverage, and variable access to specialist diagnostics. Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines differ in reimbursement systems, laboratory capacity, and availability of advanced therapies. Regional priorities include improving early diagnosis, standardizing pathology and flow cytometry services, broadening access to essential medicines, and developing referral networks for transplantation and cellular therapy.

The GCC is investing heavily in advanced oncology infrastructure, genomic medicine, tertiary referral centers, and international clinical standards. Hematological malignancy care in the group is increasingly supported by transplant services, molecular diagnostics, and specialized hematology teams. The region's strategic focus includes national cancer registries, precision medicine integration, workforce development, and patient access pathways for complex therapies, while cross-border care coordination remains relevant due to population mobility and specialized service concentration.

Key Country Insights Across Hematological Malignancies

China is rapidly expanding hematological malignancy diagnostics, clinical research, transplant capacity, and domestic innovation in cell therapy and targeted treatment approaches. The United States is a global leader in hematological malignancy research, clinical trial access, molecular diagnostics, cellular therapy, transplantation, and real-world evidence generation, though access remains uneven across insurance status, geography, socioeconomic background, and race. Japan has a highly developed hematology system, strong aging-population relevance, advanced diagnostics, and established clinical research in leukemias, lymphomas, myeloma, and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma.

India has a large patient population and growing hematology expertise, with major cancer centers advancing transplantation, diagnostics, and clinical trials, while affordability and regional access remain central challenges. Germany has advanced laboratory infrastructure, high clinical research activity, and broad hematology-oncology expertise, making it a key European center for leukemia, lymphoma, and myeloma care. The United Kingdom has strong hematological malignancy guidelines, cancer registries, genomic medicine initiatives, and specialist centers, with continued focus on timely diagnosis, treatment capacity, and access to innovative therapies.

Australia provides high-standard hematological malignancy care through specialized cancer centers, clinical trial networks, population-based data systems, and increasing integration of genomic medicine. France combines comprehensive oncology networks with strong translational research and structured access pathways, while emphasizing quality standards and multidisciplinary management. South Korea has advanced oncology infrastructure, strong diagnostic capabilities, transplant expertise, and growing clinical research activity, with emphasis on precision treatment, immunotherapy, and quality cancer care delivery.

Italy has strong cooperative research groups, well-developed hematology centers, and broad experience in lymphoma, leukemia, and myeloma care. Canada combines universal healthcare coverage with strong hematology expertise and cancer registry infrastructure, while ongoing priorities include reducing wait times, improving rural access, and expanding timely access to precision diagnostics and advanced therapies. Russia has significant hematology expertise in major cities and established transplant capabilities, though regional differences in access to diagnostics and newer treatments remain important.

Brazil has extensive clinical expertise and regional oncology hubs, with growing capabilities in hematopathology, transplantation, and clinical research, while disparities across states and healthcare sectors influence patient pathways. Mexico is improving oncology infrastructure and hematology services, particularly in major urban centers, but continues to face challenges related to early diagnosis, public-private disparities, and access to specialized treatments. Spain demonstrates mature oncology networks, transplant programs, and clinical research participation, with increasing integration of molecular testing and immunotherapy in specialized centers.

Actionable Recommendations for Hematological Malignancy Leaders

Industry leaders should prioritize precision oncology integration by strengthening access to validated molecular diagnostics, measurable residual disease testing, flow cytometry, cytogenetics, and standardized pathology workflows. Investment in interoperable data systems is essential to connect laboratory findings, imaging, treatment history, toxicity data, and outcomes in a way that supports clinical decisions and real-world evidence generation.

Organizations developing or delivering therapies should focus on treatment sequencing evidence, safety management protocols, and patient selection criteria, especially for targeted therapies, CAR-T cell therapy, bispecific antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, and transplant-related strategies. Building referral pathways between community practices and specialist centers can reduce delays for patients with aggressive, relapsed, or refractory disease.

Healthcare systems should expand workforce training in hematopathology, molecular oncology, cell therapy operations, infection prevention, and supportive care. Equally important is the development of standardized care pathways for febrile neutropenia, cytokine release syndrome, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity, tumor lysis syndrome, thrombosis, anemia, and long-term survivorship monitoring.

Leaders should also address access and equity by supporting financial navigation, decentralized testing, telehematology, patient education, and regional center-of-excellence models. Partnerships with public health agencies, academic networks, diagnostic laboratories, and patient advocacy groups can accelerate earlier diagnosis and improve continuity of care. For artificial intelligence adoption, organizations should implement governance frameworks covering model validation, bias monitoring, cybersecurity, data privacy, clinical accountability, and post-deployment performance tracking.

Research Methodology for Hematological Malignancies Analysis

This executive summary is developed using a structured secondary research approach focused on verified, publicly available, and evidence-based sources relevant to hematological malignancies. The methodology emphasizes peer-reviewed medical literature, international cancer classification frameworks, clinical practice guidelines, public health agency publications, cancer registry insights, regulatory documents, and consensus statements from recognized oncology and hematology bodies.

The research approach includes disease-level assessment across leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, myelodysplastic syndromes, myeloproliferative neoplasms, and related blood cancers. Key themes are evaluated across diagnostics, therapeutics, clinical workflows, regional access patterns, digital health adoption, artificial intelligence applications, supportive care, survivorship, and health system readiness. Special attention is given to data consistency, clinical relevance, source credibility, and alignment with current evidence-based practice.

Regional, group, and country insights are synthesized through comparative evaluation of healthcare infrastructure, diagnostic availability, specialist capacity, research activity, reimbursement environments, registry maturity, and access to advanced therapies. The analysis avoids market sizing, market share estimation, and forecasting, focusing instead on qualitative, data-backed interpretation of clinical and industry dynamics.

To maintain analytical integrity, findings are cross-checked across multiple source categories where possible. The methodology prioritizes accuracy, neutrality, and practical relevance for decision-makers involved in hematology-oncology care delivery, therapeutic development, diagnostics, policy planning, and healthcare infrastructure investment.

Conclusion

Hematological malignancies are entering a new era defined by precision diagnostics, immune-based therapies, molecular risk stratification, measurable residual disease monitoring, and increasingly data-driven care. The field is moving beyond traditional treatment paradigms toward personalized approaches that consider disease biology, patient fitness, treatment history, access constraints, and long-term quality of life.

Regional and country-level differences remain decisive. Advanced health systems are accelerating adoption of genomic testing, cellular therapy, bispecific antibodies, and integrated oncology data platforms, while many emerging and resource-limited settings continue to prioritize early diagnosis, pathology strengthening, essential medicine access, blood service reliability, and specialist workforce development. These disparities create a clear need for scalable, evidence-based models that improve care quality without widening access gaps.

Artificial intelligence, real-world evidence, and digital care coordination will increasingly influence hematological malignancy management, but their value depends on rigorous validation, equitable datasets, and responsible implementation. Industry leaders that combine scientific innovation with operational readiness, patient-centered access strategies, and strong evidence generation will be best positioned to support better outcomes across leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma, and related blood cancers.

Table of Contents

1. Preface

• 1.1. Objectives of the Study
• 1.2. Market Definition
• 1.3. Market Segmentation & Coverage
• 1.4. Years Considered for the Study
• 1.5. Currency Considered for the Study
• 1.6. Language Considered for the Study
• 1.7. Key Stakeholders

2. Research Methodology

• 2.1. Introduction
• 2.2. Research Design
  • 2.2.1. Primary Research
  • 2.2.2. Secondary Research
• 2.3. Research Framework
  • 2.3.1. Qualitative Analysis
  • 2.3.2. Quantitative Analysis
• 2.4. Market Size Estimation
  • 2.4.1. Top-Down Approach
  • 2.4.2. Bottom-Up Approach
• 2.5. Data Triangulation
• 2.6. Research Outcomes
• 2.7. Research Assumptions
• 2.8. Research Limitations

3. Executive Summary

• 3.1. Introduction
• 3.2. CXO Perspective
• 3.3. Market Size & Growth Trends
• 3.4. New Revenue Opportunities
• 3.5. Next-Generation Business Models
• 3.6. Industry Roadmap

4. Market Overview

• 4.1. Introduction
• 4.2. Industry Ecosystem & Value Chain Analysis
  • 4.2.1. Supply-Side Analysis
  • 4.2.2. Demand-Side Analysis
  • 4.2.3. Stakeholder Analysis
• 4.3. Market Dynamics
  • 4.3.1. Key Drivers
  • 4.3.2. Key Restraints
  • 4.3.3. Key Opportunities
  • 4.3.4. Key Challenges
• 4.4. Porter's Five Forces Analysis
• 4.5. PESTLE Analysis
• 4.6. Market Outlook
  • 4.6.1. Near-Term Market Outlook (0-2 Years)
  • 4.6.2. Medium-Term Market Outlook (3-5 Years)
  • 4.6.3. Long-Term Market Outlook (5-10 Years)
• 4.7. Go-to-Market Strategy

5. Market Insights

• 5.1. Consumer Insights & End-User Perspective
• 5.2. Consumer Experience Benchmarking
• 5.3. Opportunity Mapping
• 5.4. Distribution Channel Analysis
• 5.5. Pricing Trend Analysis
• 5.6. Regulatory Compliance & Standards Framework
• 5.7. ESG & Sustainability Analysis
• 5.8. Disruption & Risk Scenarios
• 5.9. Return on Investment & Cost-Benefit Analysis

6. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2026

7. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Disease Type

• 7.1. Introduction
• 7.2. Leukemia
  • 7.2.1. Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
  • 7.2.2. Acute Myeloid Leukemia
  • 7.2.3. Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
  • 7.2.4. Chronic Myeloid Leukemia
• 7.3. Lymphoma
  • 7.3.1. Hodgkin Lymphoma
    • 7.3.1.1. Classical
    • 7.3.1.2. Nodular Lymphocyte-Predominant
  • 7.3.2. Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma
    • 7.3.2.1. B-Cell
    • 7.3.2.2. T-Cell
• 7.4. Multiple Myeloma
• 7.5. Myelodysplastic Syndromes
  • 7.5.1. Refractory Anemia
  • 7.5.2. Refractory Anemia With Excess Blasts
  • 7.5.3. Refractory Anemia With Ring Sideroblasts
  • 7.5.4. Refractory Cytopenia With Multilineage Dysplasia
• 7.6. Myeloproliferative Neoplasms
  • 7.6.1. Essential Thrombocythemia
  • 7.6.2. Myelofibrosis
  • 7.6.3. Polycythemia Vera

8. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Treatment Type

• 8.1. Introduction
• 8.2. Chemotherapy
• 8.3. Immunotherapy
  • 8.3.1. CAR-T Cell Therapy
  • 8.3.2. Checkpoint Inhibitors
• 8.4. Stem Cell Transplantation
  • 8.4.1. Allogeneic
  • 8.4.2. Autologous
• 8.5. Targeted Therapy
  • 8.5.1. Immunomodulators
    • 8.5.1.1. Lenalidomide
    • 8.5.1.2. Thalidomide
  • 8.5.2. Monoclonal Antibodies
    • 8.5.2.1. Anti-CD20
    • 8.5.2.2. Anti-CD38
  • 8.5.3. Proteasome Inhibitors
    • 8.5.3.1. Bortezomib
    • 8.5.3.2. Carfilzomib
  • 8.5.4. Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors
    • 8.5.4.1. BCR-ABL Inhibitors
    • 8.5.4.2. BTK Inhibitors

9. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Patient Age Group

• 9.1. Introduction
• 9.2. Adult
• 9.3. Geriatric
• 9.4. Pediatric

10. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Drug Class

• 10.1. Introduction
• 10.2. Alkylating Agents
• 10.3. Antimetabolites
• 10.4. Corticosteroids
• 10.5. Monoclonal Antibodies
• 10.6. Small Molecule Inhibitors
• 10.7. Proteasome Inhibitors
• 10.8. Immunomodulatory Drugs
• 10.9. Kinase Inhibitors

11. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Route Of Administration

• 11.1. Introduction
• 11.2. Oral
• 11.3. Intravenous
• 11.4. Subcutaneous
• 11.5. Intrathecal

12. Hematological Malignancies Market, by End User

• 12.1. Introduction
• 12.2. Ambulatory Care Centers
• 12.3. Hospitals
• 12.4. Research Institutes
• 12.5. Specialty Clinics

13. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Distribution Channel

• 13.1. Introduction
• 13.2. Offline
• 13.3. Online

14. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Region

• 14.1. Asia-Pacific
• 14.2. Europe
• 14.3. North America
• 14.4. Latin America
• 14.5. Africa
• 14.6. Middle East

15. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Group

• 15.1. NATO
• 15.2. G7
• 15.3. BRICS
• 15.4. European Union
• 15.5. ASEAN
• 15.6. GCC

16. Hematological Malignancies Market, by Country

• 16.1. China
• 16.2. United States
• 16.3. Japan
• 16.4. India
• 16.5. Germany
• 16.6. United Kingdom
• 16.7. Australia
• 16.8. France
• 16.9. South Korea
• 16.10. Italy
• 16.11. Canada
• 16.12. Russia
• 16.13. Brazil
• 16.14. Mexico
• 16.15. Spain

17. Competitive Landscape

• 17.1. Market Share Analysis, 2025
• 17.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2025
• 17.3. Market Concentration Analysis, 2025
  • 17.3.1. Concentration Ratio (CR)
  • 17.3.2. Herfindahl Hirschman Index (HHI)
• 17.4. Recent Developments & Impact Analysis, 2025
• 17.5. Product Portfolio Analysis, 2025
• 17.6. Benchmarking Analysis, 2025

18. Company Profiles

• 18.1. AbbVie Inc.
• 18.2. Amgen Inc.
• 18.3. Astellas Pharma Inc.
• 18.4. AstraZeneca PLC
• 18.5. Bayer AG
• 18.6. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
• 18.7. Daiichi Sankyo Company Limited
• 18.8. Eisai Co., Ltd.
• 18.9. Eli Lilly and Company
• 18.10. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd
• 18.11. Gilead Sciences, Inc.
• 18.12. GlaxoSmithKline PLC
• 18.13. Incyte Corporation
• 18.14. Ipsen SA
• 18.15. Jazz Pharmaceuticals PLC
• 18.16. Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc
• 18.17. Kyowa Kirin Company Limited
• 18.18. Merck & Co., Inc.
• 18.19. Merck KGaA
• 18.20. Novartis AG
• 18.21. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
• 18.22. Pfizer Inc.
• 18.23. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.
• 18.24. Sanofi S.A.
• 18.25. Servier Laboratories
• 18.26. Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB
• 18.27. Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited
• 18.28. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited