‘I thought we’d be faster and I was wrong’: Sanofi chief defends R&D pivot
Paul Hudson struggles to convince investors he can plot a more profitable future for the French pharma group
Paul Hudson has yet to solve a conundrum raised with him when he took charge of Sanofi in 2019: finding a successor to its hit drug Dupixent.
The eczema and asthma treatment made up more than a third of the French pharmaceutical company’s sales last year, but trial setbacks last year have increased pressure on its British boss as the drug nears the end of its patent protection in the early 2030s.
Making up for the impending loss of Dupixent profits is all the more urgent for Hudson as Sanofi’s board weighs whether to renew his mandate, due to expire this year. Advisers to the company, former senior employees and analysts told the FT that Hudson had yet to show he could deliver future growth.
Defending his record in an interview with the FT, Hudson said more time would be required for his research and development-led push to bear fruit after a “difficult 2025”.
“My first conversation in September 2019 was ‘how are we going to manage the end of Dupixent?’,” he said. “The next 12 to 24 months will tell us whether the choices we’ve made — I’ve made — will put us on track.”
In the more than six years since he arrived from Novartis, Hudson has sought to transform Sanofi from a vast business spread across multiple pharmaceutical sectors and countries to a more focused, research-led operation that can discover more of its own medicines.
One of the former employees said Hudson had a “negative view” of the company’s past performance and its lack of focus: “We were weak, indecisive, caught in-between: we did everything and he wanted to do less.”
The Mancunian has invested in R&D and sought to streamline the company, including by selling off half of Sanofi’s consumer healthcare business in 2024, following similar moves by rival pharmaceutical groups.
Sanofi has also successfully expanded sales and treatment areas for immunology treatment Dupixent, underlining its historic strengths in marketing treatments. The drug was jointly developed by US biotech Regeneron, with which Sanofi splits the profits.
In recent results, Sanofi reported €43.6bn in sales and €12.1bn in operating income, showing strong growth from 2024 and continued strong profit margins for the group under Hudson. But 2025 has also brought home how efforts to foster in-house innovation have yet to materialise.
Since Hudson announced a poorly received strategy to focus on more R&D spending in 2023, research costs rose to €7.8bn last year — but there is little to show for it.
Nicolas Dumas, a partner at Roland Berger and former Sanofi employee, said Hudson had been “rather courageous” in cutting back management and reducing investment in underperforming areas. But he added: “In 2025, they had very bad news . . . there is nothing to replace Dupixent.”
In September, the company had almost $13bn wiped off its market value in one day after its experimental eczema drug amlitelimab underwhelmed compared with Dupixent in treating a severe form of the disease. The stock is down more than a fifth over the past 12 months, leaving it worth about €100bn.
Tolebrutinib, an experimental drug for multiple sclerosis, also faced a double setback in December. The US Food and Drug Administration refused to approve its use in an advanced form of the autoimmune disorder and the drug failed a late-stage trial in another form of MS.
While trial failures form part of the vicissitudes of the pharmaceutical industry and R&D investment takes time to deliver results, the setbacks have underlined a lack of depth in Sanofi’s pipeline, which had just six blockbuster drugs excluding vaccines in 2025 — far fewer than most European pharma rivals.
Several people said that management had overhyped potential drugs, with overly confident projections that have riled investors and analysts, adding to pressure on Hudson.
One of the people familiar with the board said Sanofi’s “stagnating” share price and uncertain outlook had put the question of Hudson’s future “on the table” ahead of a general assembly in April, while several other people familiar with the company said that Hudson’s role ought to be in question.
Asked about criticism of the company’s presentation of pipeline drugs, Hudson said: “On occasion, the data has been very encouraging and then surprised to the negative. Then it’s very easy for people to say, well, you were too optimistic.”
But the trial failures have intensified doubts over whether Hudson’s research-focused turnaround will bear fruit.
Hudson said he had “underestimated” the difficulty of turning the group into a more innovative company. “I thought we’d be faster and I was wrong because I think our starting point was further back than I expected,” he said.
He suggested Sanofi would turn to more acquisitions to replace Dupixent if further drugs failed. The company’s $9.5bn purchase of Blueprint Medicines last year was its largest under Hudson’s tenure and gave it a drug already approved, pushing up the acquisition price.
But with just $725mn in pro forma sales for this immunology treatment Ayvakit last year, Sanofi will need to develop or buy in more new treatments to address concerns over impending lost income from Dupixent.
Hudson pointed to upcoming trial results in Crohn’s disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and oncology as tests of the company’s improved R&D output.
However, Peter Verdult, a pharmaceutical analyst at BNP Paribas, said there appeared to be few significant trials in 2026 to win back investors.
Sanofi was in the “proverbial doghouse” among investors, with several pointing the finger at Hudson’s leadership, he added. “It’s noticeable and in some ways it’s understandable because of how poorly the shares have performed.”
Still, Hudson is far from solely responsible for the company’s struggles, with several people also questioning the strength of the board and its chair, Frédéric Oudéa.
Oudéa struggled to steer French bank Société Générale through a string of scandals during 15 years as chief executive. He had no experience of the pharmaceutical industry before his appointment in 2023.
One of the bankers familiar with the business said: “Paul Hudson does not have, unfortunately for him, a board who will accompany him as it should.”
Sanofi said it would not comment on speculation regarding Oudéa, adding that the board had “deep expertise across pharmaceuticals, science, technologies, finance and global business”.
Beyond his renewal, Hudson also faces a testing 2026 in charge of leading industry interactions with the Trump administration when he takes the rotating chair of trade body PhRMA later this year.
Sanofi’s vaccine sales have already taken a hit after changes to vaccination schedules by the administration. The company also joined other drugmakers in striking an agreement to lower some US drug prices at the end of last year, although this did not have a meaningful impact on the 2026 outlook.
Asked about the future of his own leadership, Hudson replied: “It’s really a board decision on whether they think we’re making enough progress . . . we need the pipeline success for people to say ‘you know what? We’re finally an R&D-led organisation’.”
