Ormeval provides decision-support intelligence derived from public sources. It is not investment, medical, legal or regulatory advice, and states nothing about the value of any security. Forward figures are deterministic model estimates, not guidance.
Keytruda (pembrolizumab) · anti-PD-1 · Merck & Co.
This page covers the R/R classical Hodgkin lymphoma pembrolizumab indication only (KEYNOTE-087 + KEYNOTE-204), NOT the 1L NSCLC, melanoma, or other solid-tumour Keytruda settings, and NOT frontline cHL. See all Keytruda indications →
On label; year and trial pairing both correct, date added. Current label 1.5 carries two statements: 'for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory cHL' and 'for the treatment of pediatric patients with refractory cHL, or cHL that has relapsed after 2 or more lines of therapy.' The 2017-03-14 action was an ACCELERATED approval on KEYNOTE-087, and at that time was restricted to refractory disease or relapse after 3 or more prior lines. KEYNOTE-204 supported conversion to traditional approval on 2020-10-14, which also removed the line requirement entirely for adults and relaxed it to 2-plus lines for paediatric patients. So the adult indication is now materially broader than at launch, and it is no longer accelerated. Not carried on the Qlex subcutaneous label.
All markets
2026 net revenue · modelled
$125M
CONCLUDED · 2026 modelled net revenue - indication slice, all markets; Merck & Co. reports no indication revenue. Modelled net revenue · sourced funnel
No model change since the 20 Sep 2026 snapshot.
The 15-second read
R/R classical Hodgkin lymphoma is a mature, plateaued niche worth roughly 1% of the Keytruda franchise: the model peaked at $149M back in 2021-22, sits at $125M today, and grinds down to $33M by 2034. Two forces set that shape, and neither is about efficacy, KEYNOTE-204's randomized PFS win over brentuximab vedotin (13.2 vs 8.3 months, HR 0.65) already banked Keytruda the favoured half of a PD-1 niche split with Opdivo, so there is no share upside left to win, while frontline IO (nivo+AVD, pembro+chemo) cures more patients up front and structurally shrinks the relapsed pool feeding it. The honest read is a durable cash line being managed into the ~2028 US LOE, not an asset with a future.
Threats land:If frontline checkpoint regimens shrink the relapsed pool faster than the modelled ~1-2%/yr and biosimilars take the IV volume promptly after the ~2028 US LOE, the line falls below $33M well before 2034.
Modelled path:The niche holds near $125M through 2026-27, then erodes through biosimilar entry and a shrinking R/R pool to $33M by 2034.
Levers land:Subcutaneous Keytruda Qlex holds a meaningful slice of administration volume past the IV LOE and BV-IO combinations extend pembrolizumab's role within cHL, flattening the post-2028 erosion.
The ~28% of classical Hodgkin patients modelled as reaching PD-1 therapy in the relapsed/refractory setting, an Ormeval scoping estimate built from a 15-25% relapse rate broadened for refractory disease, with no reported indication-level actuals to check it against.
At a glance
Mechanism anti-PD-1
Clinical
Commercial
Development to approval
These are regulatory approval dates (FDA/EMA/NMPA/PMDA), not commercial launch; launch follows after pricing & reimbursement (see the access-lag column in the HTA table). All four regulators have approved this indication. Cross-checked against Merck & Co. disclosures and regulator databases.
R/R cHL is a small but emblematic Keytruda indication: it demonstrated checkpoint blockade in a biomarker-defined (9p24.1/PD-L1) hematologic malignancy and was the FIRST randomized PD-1 win in lymphoma (KEYNOTE-204 vs brentuximab vedotin), strengthening Keytruda's heme credentials beyond its solid-tumour dominance. Commercially it is a niche, durable cash line rather than a growth engine: the addressable pool is intrinsically small (cHL is curable for most) and is split with nivolumab (Opdivo). The strategic value is franchise breadth, the randomized-superiority claim that anchors guideline preference, and durable per-patient economics in a young, long-treated population, managed into the ~2028 pembrolizumab LOE while frontline IO steadily erodes the relapsed pool.
Classical Hodgkin lymphoma is highly curable, but the relapsed/refractory minority, especially after autologous transplant and brentuximab vedotin, needed new options. KEYNOTE-087 showed pembrolizumab produces a high ORR (~69%, CR ~22%; FDA accelerated approval Mar 2017), and KEYNOTE-204 added the only randomized PD-1 win in cHL, superior PFS vs brentuximab vedotin (HR 0.65; FDA expanded approval Oct 2020), exploiting cHL's near-universal 9p24.1/PD-L1 biology. It is a small, durable niche split with nivolumab (Opdivo), with Keytruda taking roughly half the PD-1 share and modestly favoured post-KEYNOTE-204, a ~$0.3–0.4bn Keytruda slice facing the ~2028 LOE and a frontline-IO-driven shrinking pool.
Classical Hodgkin lymphoma is a relatively uncommon, predominantly young-adult B-cell lymphoma that is highly curable with frontline chemotherapy (± radiotherapy), so the relapsed/refractory population is a small fraction of incident cases. Those who relapse are typically salvaged with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT), and brentuximab vedotin (BV, a CD30 antibody-drug conjugate) is widely used around transplant. Patients who progress after frontline (± ASCT/BV) had limited options until checkpoint inhibitors: cHL Reed–Sternberg cells carry near-universal 9p24.1 amplification that overexpresses PD-L1/PD-L2, making the disease exquisitely sensitive to PD-1 blockade. KEYNOTE-087/-204 (pembrolizumab) and CheckMate-205 (nivolumab) established checkpoint inhibitors in this R/R setting; KEYNOTE-204's randomized PFS win vs brentuximab vedotin made pembrolizumab the preferred PD-1 for many. Across the 8 modelled markets the R/R cHL pool is small, a few thousand patients per year, but responses are deep and durable, and the young-adult demographic means extended treatment in responders. The pool is now SHRINKING as PD-1 blockade moves frontline (SWOG S1826 nivo+AVD; KEYNOTE-C11 pembro+chemo) cures more patients up front.
KEYNOTE-087 was the pivotal single-arm Phase 2 trial of pembrolizumab in relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma across three cohorts (post-ASCT + brentuximab vedotin; salvage + BV without ASCT; post-ASCT without BV), reporting an objective response rate of ~69% (CR ~22%), the basis for the March 2017 FDA accelerated approval. KEYNOTE-204 then took the indication to a randomized footing: a Phase 3 trial vs brentuximab vedotin that showed superior progression-free survival (median 13.2 vs 8.3 months; HR 0.65), the only randomized PD-1 win in cHL, supporting the October 2020 full/expanded approval. cHL is uniquely sensitive to PD-1 blockade because of near-universal 9p24.1 amplification driving PD-L1/PD-L2 overexpression on Reed–Sternberg cells. The setting is a small, durable heme niche shared with nivolumab (Opdivo, CheckMate-205) and reshaped by the move of checkpoint inhibitors into frontline therapy.
Both pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-087/-204) and nivolumab (CheckMate-205) are recommended in R/R cHL after ASCT and brentuximab vedotin. KEYNOTE-204's randomized PFS benefit vs brentuximab vedotin makes pembrolizumab the preferred PD-1 for many in a small, durable niche split with nivolumab.
KEYNOTE-087 (n=210): single-arm, three-cohort Phase 2; pembrolizumab 200 mg q3w in R/R cHL (post-ASCT + BV; salvage + BV without ASCT; post-ASCT without BV); primary endpoint ORR by blinded independent central review. KEYNOTE-204 (n=304): randomized, open-label Phase 3; pembrolizumab 200 mg q3w vs brentuximab vedotin 1.8 mg/kg q3w (up to 35 cycles) in R/R cHL relapsing after, or ineligible for, ASCT; primary endpoint PFS.
Load-bearing 4/5 sourced. ASSUMED uptake is yours to change.
This indication only, not Keytruda's total revenue
Pembrolizumab monotherapy in relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma after frontline therapy (± autologous stem-cell transplant and brentuximab vedotin), the KEYNOTE-087 single-arm program (ORR ~69%, FDA accelerated approval Mar 2017) extended to a randomized footing by KEYNOTE-204 (PFS superior to brentuximab vedotin; FDA full/expanded approval Oct 2020). A small but durable, biomarker-driven heme niche.
Reported actuals are always drawn and need no chip: a cited reported figure is a fact, not a claim. Everything forward of them is one of the 4 kinds above.
$125M
8 modelled markets (US, EU5, JP, CN) · modelled net revenue · 2026 (forecast)
Peak $149M · launch 2017 → 2034
modeled history (left of today)·click any year to decompose its funnel below.
Measured band: none - no measured band: n<8
Bull / bear elsewhere in the product are a sensitivity (fixed multipliers), not this band.
Pre-2026 figures are MODELLED (no indication × country actuals are reported) and calibrated to a ~$0.35–0.4bn peak, a small, durable ~1% niche slice of Merck's reported ~$31.7B Keytruda franchise (FY2025). This is roughly HALF of the ~$0.6–0.8bn PD-1 cHL class (the other half is nivolumab/Opdivo, CheckMate-205, ~$0.3B), with Keytruda modestly favoured after KEYNOTE-204's randomized PFS win. The slice ramps from the 2017 accelerated approval, steps up modestly with the 2020 expanded label, plateaus, then erodes from ~2028 (US composition-of-matter LOE; biosimilars EU ~2029), partly defended by SC Qlex. The forward pool is also pressured downward by frontline IO (SWOG S1826) shrinking the relapsed population. The 'today' marker splits modelled history from forecast.
No reported anchor exists at this grain: companies publish this asset as one product line and never split it by indication × country, so every year above is modelled, including the years already past. The claims below are scored against reported actuals wherever a program has them.
A forecast year closes when an actual is reported for it. A miss is the distance from that actual, signed as the claim fell: under it, or over it.
| Claim | Closed years | Worst miss | Worst miss % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ormeval modelMODELLED · Ormeval · live | - | no closed year yet | - |
A superseded team version keeps its own row: what it was off by is still a fact about that version. A row with no closed year is not a good score.
What it shows. A modelled base-case net-revenue curve for this indication, year by year, split at 'today' into modelled history and forecast, with the branded curve shown against its in-class rivals.
What to look for. The peak year and how steep the decline is after loss of exclusivity, and where a rival's curve crosses yours, that crossing is the share the model has you losing.
Common misread. Reading the pre-'today' portion as reported actuals (it's modelled), or treating the base case as a company target. It is one deterministic Ormeval-modelled scenario anchored to cited actuals, not guidance and not analyst consensus.
Key model assumptions · Nothing here is reported: the entire pre-2026 history is modelled and calibrated top-down to a ~1% slice of the $31.7B franchise, resting on an estimated R/R-reach fraction, an assumed ~50/50 PD-1 split with Opdivo, and a ~$185k US net per patient inferred from longer exposure in young durable responders.
The decline is defended, not certain
The decline is doubly defended, the ~2028 US composition-of-matter LOE is a dated legal fact and frontline IO shrinking the relapsed pool is already visible in SWOG S1826 and KEYNOTE-C11, but the rate is a judgement, and subcutaneous Qlex could hold more volume past the LOE than modelled.
What would change our mind
If pembrolizumab biosimilars do not reach the US market on the assumed ~2028 timeline, or Qlex retains most cHL administration volume after IV biosimilars enter, the sharp 2028-31 drop from $99M to $41M is too steep and the base case is wrong.
A scenario is your own assumptions layered on Ormeval’s cited baseline. We never change the baseline; save as many named scenarios as you like and click one to load it back later.
| Driver · 2026 | US | FR | DE | IT | ES | UK | JP | CN | Total | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Classical Hodgkin lymphoma incidenceest | 8.5k | 2.0k | 2.6k | 2.2k | 1.5k | 2.1k | 2.2k | 6.8k | 28k | GLOBOCAN 2022 |
New classical Hodgkin lymphoma cases per year; flat trend. Country-specific GLOBOCAN 2022 Hodgkin lymphoma incidence (predominantly classical); an uncommon, young-adult-weighted lymphoma. Flat incidence trend. SAME epidemiology base as the nivolumab R/R cHL model (CheckMate-205), identical disease. | ||||||||||
| × classical HLest | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | share, not summed | cHL ~90% |
Classical Hodgkin lymphoma subtype (~90% of Hodgkin lymphoma; excludes nodular lymphocyte-predominant). Classical Hodgkin lymphoma is ~90% of all Hodgkin lymphoma (the remainder nodular lymphocyte-predominant); modelled flat across markets. Same basis as the nivolumab R/R cHL model. | ||||||||||
| × R/R reaching PD-1 (post-frontline ± ASCT/BV)est | 28% | 28% | 28% | 28% | 28% | 28% | 28% | 28% | share, not summed | R/R ~28% |
Of cHL, the relapsed/refractory fraction reaching the checkpoint-inhibitor setting after frontline therapy (± transplant/brentuximab vedotin), ~28%; most cHL is cured frontline. Most cHL is cured with frontline therapy; ~15–25% relapse after frontline, and the fraction that progresses (± through ASCT and brentuximab vedotin) and reaches PD-1 blockade is modelled at ~28% of cHL, a generous reach estimate covering the broader R/R IO-eligible population, matched to the nivolumab R/R cHL model for cross-consistency. The pool is intrinsically small AND shrinking as PD-1 moves frontline (see pool trajectory). | ||||||||||
| = Addressable R/R cHL pool (post-frontline ± ASCT/BV) | 2.1k | 489 | 636 | 538 | 367 | 513 | 538 | 1.7k | 6.8k | computed |
Hodgkin lymphoma incidence × classical HL (~90%) × R/R reaching PD-1 (~28%), the small niche pool pembrolizumab can reach this year (shrinking as PD-1 moves frontline). The R/R cHL pool is small and was roughly stable into the early 2020s (flat incidence; high cure rate keeps the relapsed fraction modest), but now drifts DOWN ~1–2%/yr as checkpoint inhibitors move frontline, SWOG S1826 (nivolumab+AVD, 2023) and pembrolizumab+chemo 1L (KEYNOTE-C11) cure more patients up front, shrinking the relapsed fraction that ever reaches the R/R IO niche. The competitive dynamics that matter are the nivolumab (CheckMate-205) ~50/50 PD-1 split, the KEYNOTE-204 randomized-superiority edge, and the ~2028 LOE. | ||||||||||
| × Keytruda uptake (branded) | 18% | 18% | 18% | 18% | 18% | 18% | 14% | 12% | share, not summed | ASSUMED |
Per-market branded uptake of the addressable pool this year (launch ramp net of competitors & biosimilars). See the competitive curve below; pick a market for its access basis. | ||||||||||
| = Treated with Keytruda | 373 | 89 | 116 | 94 | 64 | 90 | 76 | 206 | 1.1k | computed · assumed input |
Addressable pool × branded uptake. | ||||||||||
| × Net price / patient (2026) | $170K | $101K | $111K | $97K | $81K | $101K | $88K | $46K | per patient, not summed | ASP · HTA · NHI |
Same pembrolizumab molecule/dosing as the 1L-NSCLC model: 200 mg q3w (or 400 mg q6w) IV until progression / 35 cycles, so per-patient revenue is the annual net cost while on-drug. The young-adult, durable-responder cHL population is treated for extended periods, so realized exposure is long: US ASP ≈ $11.8k/200 mg (~$205k/yr list) net of ~10–15% physician-administered-biologic GTN → ~$185k/yr net (modestly above the NSCLC ~$180k to reflect longer realized exposure in young responders). EU HTA-discounted (~$95–125k); Japan biennial-cut haircut (~$95k); China self-pay (~$50k) vs NRDL domestic PD-1s. −4%/yr forward into LOE; held flat before 2024. Calibration: the annual-net × small-pool structure brings modelled WW peak to ~$0.35–0.4bn, the Keytruda half of the ~$0.6–0.8bn PD-1 cHL class. ALL net prices are ESTIMATES, consistent with KEYTRUDA_1L_NSCLC_MODEL. SHOWN FOR 2026: the per-market figures in "Net pricing: assumptions & basis" below are the 2024 basis; this row applies -4%/yr from 2024 (×0.9216), so it is the same source value at a later date, not a second price. | ||||||||||
| = Net revenue / yrOutput | $63.7M | $9.0M | $12.8M | $9.1M | $5.2M | $9.1M | $6.6M | $9.5M | $125M | computed · assumed input |
Treated patients × realized net price. | ||||||||||
Regional revenue mix · 2026 modelled
Model estimate, sourced from the funnel table above
No reported competitor-share series exists for this setting, so every trajectory below is modelled from approval timing, label breadth and the funnel, not reported data.
In-class share, R/R classical Hodgkin lymphoma (pembrolizumab): 8 modelled markets (US, EU5, JP, CN)
Each agent's share of the small addressable R/R cHL pool. The branded pembrolizumab line shows a 2017 launch ramp, a stable niche plateau (with a KEYNOTE-204-driven step up in PD-1 share from ~2020), then erosion into biosimilar entry at the ~2028 LOE; nivolumab (CheckMate-205) splits the PD-1 share.
Share of the 6.8k-patient addressable R/R cHL pool (post-frontline ± ASCT/BV) this regimen is modelled to treat, by year
Keytruda is modelled at 16% of this pool in 2026, peaking at 17% in 2022; each point of share is revenue on the chart above.
Scope: 8 modelled markets (US, EU5, JP, CN) · follows the market selector above
Rivals' share, same pool
Nivolumab (Opdivo) holds the largest rival share in 2026, 19% of the pool; that is the share Keytruda has to take or hold.
Rivals, rescaled - note the axis maximum (30%), which is smaller than the plot above. Same data, a linear axis of its own, so a low-share entrant is readable rather than a hairline on the baseline.
Launch ramp = market approval + access timing (US acc. Mar 2017, EU/Japan 2017–18, expanded Oct 2020). Nivolumab present from ~2016 (CheckMate-205); pembrolizumab gains the randomized-superiority edge from 2020 (KEYNOTE-204). Biosimilar pembrolizumab timed to the ~2028 US LOE. Competitor trajectories are stated assumptions, not reported shares.
Readouts, approvals and LOE events for pembrolizumab and its rivals in this setting. Estimated timing is flagged; confirmed dates cited from Merck & Co. disclosures and regulator databases.
US pembrolizumab composition-of-matter expiry (~2028), biosimilar erosion begins; SC Qlex defends part of the volume
Continued frontline checkpoint-inhibitor adoption (pembro+chemo, nivo+AVD) further erodes the relapsed/refractory pool this model addresses
✓ = reported public fact, cited. Upcoming timing is estimated from company guidance and trial registries, a projection, not a commitment. Approvals = US (FDA) · EU (EMA) · Japan (PMDA) · China (NMPA). ● = pembrolizumab, competitor tag = a same-setting rival.
Residual unmet need: why the field stays alive
Even with the high response rate and the KEYNOTE-204 PFS win, most responses are partial rather than complete, randomized OS benefit has not been shown, and patients eventually progress on checkpoint blockade, after which options (allogeneic transplant, novel agents) are scarce. The move of checkpoint inhibitors and brentuximab vedotin into earlier lines reshuffles the sequence and shrinks the R/R pool, and there is no validated biomarker beyond the near-universal 9p24.1 alteration to refine selection, sustaining investigation of IO combinations and novel agents (bispecifics, BV-IO combinations) in the still-small R/R niche.
The synthesis for this indication, grounded in the cited trial, guideline and access facts above.
Rivals in this setting (R/R classical Hodgkin lymphoma)
Swipe to explore →
| Rival / regimen | Developer | Position in this setting | Approved (date, trial, n) | Head start vs this regimen (months) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nivolumab (Opdivo) (Live threat) | Bristol Myers Squibb | Live threatwhyFDA acc. approval May 2016, the direct PD-1 competitor splitting the R/R cHL niche ~50/50; pembrolizumab modestly favoured on the KEYNOTE-204 randomized win | not in the record | not in the record | CheckMate-205 (Lancet Oncol 2016) |
| Brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) (Live threat) | Pfizer / Takeda | Live threatwhyCompetes across the cHL sequence; pembrolizumab beat it on PFS in KEYNOTE-204 | not in the record | not in the record | KEYNOTE-204 comparator |
| Frontline checkpoint inhibitors (nivo+AVD / pembro+chemo) (Watch) | BMS / Merck | WatchwhyMove PD-1 to 1L, structurally shrink the relapsed/refractory pool this indication addresses | not in the record | not in the record | SWOG S1826, frontline nivolumab+AVD in advanced cHL (Herrera; NEJM 2024) |
| Domestic PD-1s (sintilimab, tislelizumab) (China rival) | Innovent / BeiGene | China rivalwhyNRDL-reimbursed and cheaper, lead R/R cHL in China; structural pressure on China share | not in the record | not in the record | ORIENT-1 / China R/R cHL trials |
| Pembrolizumab biosimilars (Watch) | Generic (post-LOE) | WatchwhyUS composition-of-matter LOE ~2028; EU ~2029, branded erosion begins; SC Qlex (Sep 2025) defends part | not in the record | not in the record | pembrolizumab LOE ~2028 (US) |
Not every rival is approved in every region, so a share here is the modelled position in the markets where it competes, not a global one.
Net pricing: assumptions & basis
Pembrolizumab is dosed 200 mg q3w (or 400 mg q6w) IV, or via subcutaneous Qlex (Sep 2025), until progression or 35 cycles (~2-year cap). Because R/R cHL patients are young with deep, durable responses, realized per-patient exposure, and net revenue, is at the high end, net of country discounts. Same pembrolizumab pricing basis as the 1L-NSCLC model.
Figures below are 2024 net prices, the basis the model is anchored on. The funnel applies -4%/yr from 2024, so the price it consumes for a later year is lower than the figure quoted here. Both come from this one value; the funnel row states the year it is showing.
Pembrolizumab dosing and pricing here are identical to the KEYTRUDA_1L_NSCLC_MODEL (same molecule): 200 mg q3w (or 400 mg q6w) IV until progression or a 35-cycle (~2-year) cap, so per-patient revenue is modelled as the annual net cost while on treatment. Because cHL patients are young and responses are deep and durable, realized treatment exposure is extended, US ASP ≈ $11,795/200 mg q3w (~$205k/yr list) ⇒ ~$185k/yr net after ~10–15% physician-administered-biologic gross-to-net (set modestly above the NSCLC ~$180k for the longer realized exposure). EU nets are HTA-negotiated (Germany ~$120k, France ~$110k, UK ~$110k via confidential PAS, Italy ~$105k, Spain lowest at ~$88k). Japan is haircut to ~$95k for biennial NHI cuts; China is self-pay (~$50k net) against NRDL-reimbursed domestic PD-1s. −4%/yr forward net erosion reflects HTA/NHI pressure accelerating into the ~2028 LOE; held flat before 2024. ALL net prices are ESTIMATES, consistent with KEYTRUDA_1L_NSCLC_MODEL.
What it shows. The approval-to-reimbursement journey by market: when each payer granted access, on what terms (PD-L1 or comparator restrictions), and the lag between regulatory approval and reimbursed revenue.
What to look for. The access-lag column, approval is not revenue and some markets take a year or more. And the restrictions that narrow the eligible population below the full label.
Common misread. Assuming a US price or approval transfers to other markets. Ex-US payers benchmark against comparators and reference prices, so the net price and the covered population are usually smaller.
Rows ordered by access speed. The approval→reimbursement lag is commercially load-bearing, and it is not one number per drug: a monotherapy indication and a later combination extension file separately with a payer and can reach routine commissioning years apart, even within the same asset’s first-line setting.
| Market | HTA body | Decision | Access lag | PD-L1 | Comparator | Key outcome / MEA note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| US | FDA | Mar 2017 (acc.) → Oct 2020 (expanded) | reference | None (R/R post-frontline ± ASCT/BV) | Single-arm (KN-087) → brentuximab vedotin (KN-204) | FDA accelerated approval 14 Mar 2017 (KN-087); full/expanded approval Oct 2020 (KN-204, incl. pediatric). Medicare Part B (J9271); small durable heme niche |
| Germany | G-BA / IQWiG | 2017–18 → 2021 | ~0.6 yr | None | - | AMNOG; reimbursed at launch; small R/R cHL pool; densest EU access |
| France | HAS | 2017–18 | ~0.8 yr | None | - | ATU early access then standard reimbursement |
| Italy | AIFA | 2018 | ~1.2 yr | None | - | Class H; +regional formulary lag |
| Spain | AEMPS | 2018 | ~1.4 yr | None | - | Managed entry; +17-region lag |
| UK | NICE TA540 | 2018 | ~1 yr | None | - | TA540 pembrolizumab for R/R cHL after ASCT/brentuximab vedotin; confidential PAS |
| Japan | PMDA / NHI | 2017–18 | ~0.6 yr | None | - | NHI-listed; biennial NHI price cuts; small cHL pool (lower per-capita HL in East Asia) |
| China | NMPA | ~2018–19* | ~1.8 yr* | None | - | *Domestic PD-1s (sintilimab/tislelizumab) lead R/R cHL on NRDL; pembrolizumab a small self-pay slice |
How much each assumption could move the forecast, one at a time, over the same cited baseline.
This is a sensitivity illustration, not a probability: it shows how far each assumption could move the forecast, never how likely it is.
Set a target and solve for one lever, what it would have to reach, benchmarked against real comparable launches.
One lever at a time: the other assumptions stay at baseline, so the trade-off stays visible.
A model that shows where its own risk is, not a number to trust. Never investment advice.
Cite this forecast as recorded on Q2 2026 → A permanent record of these figures that does not change when the model does.
Every reported figure here traces to a public source below; the model's own assumptions are labelled where they appear.
Reported figures are public facts from company filings; the forward peak is Ormeval's own modelled estimate, not company guidance and not analyst consensus. Approval and readout dates are cross-checked against public regulator and company disclosures. Not investment advice.