Skip to main content
. 2023 Dec 19;14:1272754. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1272754

TABLE 1.

Hypothetical comparison, based on expert opinion, of the development costs and return for a probiotic food (PF), probiotic dietary supplements (PDS), medical foods/foods for specific medical purposes (MF/FSMP), and live biotherapeutics (LBPs) probiotic products.

Comparative parameters PF PDS MF/FSMP LBPs “Zone” impact*
Reimbursement schemes No No Same as other MF/FSMP Yes, same as other drugs
Average R&D cost Low-Medium Low-Medium Medium-high Medium-high
Available R&D funding Limited Limited Limited Medium
Patenting possibilities Limited Limited Yes Yes
Manufacturing costs Medium-high Medium-high High High
Extent of regulatory requirements Low Low-Medium Medium-High High
Market size Broad Broad Broad Broad
Product revenue Low Low Medium High
Cost to bring to market Medium Medium Medium High
Total value of markets Low Low Medium Medium-High
Return on investment Low Low Low-medium Medium

The levels indicated assume that PF and PDS are indeed foods and supplements and as such should be affordable and cannot claim effects on disease. MF and FSMP are also foods but serve a specific medical purpose that needs to be documented and can be marketed at a somewhat higher price than their regular counterparts. LBP’s on the other hand are drugs that require thorough documentation and can be sold at drug prices. These comparisons between the product categories are intended to give an indication of hierarchy/rank/weight on the various elements, not as an empirical grading system. Many of these elements would be notoriously difficult to objectively quantify which is not within the scope of this article. *Column “zone impact”: the system of the traffic lights means that there are significant differences for, e.g., health claims, reimbursement schemes, etc., according to the jurisdiction where one operates. Red indicates that there are differences that will most likely influence the final cost. Orange indicates that there may exist influence on the final cost. Green indicates there are little or no influence on the final costs expected.