Sleep Apnea Device Makers Face New Challenge: Eli Lilly's Zepbound

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) recent approval of Eli Lilly's weight-loss drug Zepbound for treating moderate-to-severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults with obesity has sent shockwaves through the sleep apnea device market. Shares of leading device manufacturers, such as ResMed and Inspire Medical Systems, have fallen in response to the news, raising concerns about prescription medicines taking market share from their products.

Zepbound, a dual GLP-1 and GIP receptor agonist, has shown promising results in clinical trials. It was about five times more effective than placebo in reducing breathing disruptions in adults not on a positive airway pressure (PAP) device, leading to 25 fewer breathing disruptions per hour with Zepbound and five with placebo. In adults on PAP therapy, Zepbound led to 29 fewer breathing disruptions per hour compared to six with placebo. After one year, 42% of adults on Zepbound and 50% of adults on Zepbound with PAP therapy experienced remission or mild, non-symptomatic OSA, compared to 16% and 14% on placebo, respectively.

The FDA's approval of Zepbound has raised concerns about prescription medicines taking market share from makers of products that currently treat the breathing problem. ResMed's Chief Medical Officer Carlos Nunez suggested that doctors will likely prescribe weight-loss drugs like Zepbound concomitantly with positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy, such as products offered by his company. This combination could improve patient adherence and compliance by addressing the root cause of OSA (obesity) while providing immediate relief with PAP therapy.



However, the integration of weight-loss drugs into sleep apnea treatment may lead to a more diversified market, with device manufacturers adapting their strategies to maintain competitiveness. They can emphasize the unique benefits of their devices, such as portability, comfort, and ease of use, which may not be matched by Zepbound. Additionally, they can invest in research and development to innovate and improve their products, potentially offering new features or technologies that differentiate them from Zepbound.



The pricing and accessibility of Zepbound will significantly influence its adoption and, consequently, the demand for sleep apnea devices. If Zepbound is priced competitively and widely accessible, it could attract a substantial number of patients, potentially reducing the demand for devices. Conversely, if Zepbound is expensive or has limited accessibility, patients may still opt for devices, maintaining the market share of device manufacturers.

In conclusion, the FDA's approval of Eli Lilly's Zepbound for treating moderate-to-severe obstructive sleep apnea in adults with obesity has raised concerns about prescription medicines taking market share from sleep apnea device manufacturers. However, the integration of weight-loss drugs into sleep apnea treatment may lead to a more diversified market, with device manufacturers adapting their strategies to maintain competitiveness. The ultimate impact on device manufacturers' market share will depend on how Zepbound's pricing and accessibility compare to existing treatment options.