Building Biotech Technology Transfer Opportunities: Sponsor and developer strategies for success

HTML clipboard

Building Biotech Technology Transfer Opportunities: Sponsor and developer strategies for success

Drug developers have long been under pressure to introduce new products in an environment of escalating R&D costs, blockbuster patent expiration and resulting generic competition. Current weak economic conditions have exacerbated these challenges with sweeping R&D staff and budget reductions. In order to remain competitive, drug makers must now do more with less. Technology transfer, particularly of new biotechnologies that offer novel means to address unmet medical needs, offer a way to cost effectively address these challenges. They also provide technology developers with a mechanism to monetize their inventions.

However, while some drug makers and technology developers have optimized their biotech tech transfer methodologies and have developed sophisticated processes to select, monitor and manage a wide range of relationships, many other biotech tech transfer projects fail. A large proportion of these failures could be averted as many of the most common reasons for failure are preventable problems relating to due diligence failures, shortcomings in deal structure, management changes, cultural challenges, and inappropriate project organization and expectations. This report provides details on how to avoid these common pitfalls with case studies that illustrate best practices.

Key features of this report

• Discussion of the factors leading to current imperatives to increased biotech tech transfer.
• Detailed descriptions of both effective and ineffective biotech tech transfer approaches.
• In depth analysis of the types of different biotech tech transfer relationships, their advantages and disadvantages.
• More than 10 case studies that illustrate biotech tech transfer best practices.
• Comprehensive discussion of offshore biotech tech transfer, particularly focusing on India and China.

Scope of this report

• Understand the driving forces behind biotech tech transfer.
• Save time and money with the report’s succinct compilation and analysis of current biotech tech transfer trends.
• Learn how biotech tech transfer will evolve over the next several years and why.
• Assess your competitive position vis-à-vis other technology sponsors or technology developers and learn about biotech tech transfer best practices via detailed case studies.
• Understand the reasons behind biotech tech transfer success and failure.
• Develop strategies to optimize your biotech tech transfer methodologies and protocols.

Want to Live Extra Years?

Are biotech drugs really that different from traditional pharmaceuticals. You bet they are. Learn why here.

Want to Live Extra Years?

On the Brink of Generic Biotech Drugs, What’s the Cost to Innovation?

In a recently published report, the Federal Trade Commission suggested that the current allotment of a 12- to 14-year regulatory exclusivity period for product innovation to develop products at biotech companies is“too long to promote innovation.”

The same report, published June 4, also indicated that developing generic biotech drugs would help bring down the cost of U.S. health care. These less expensive versions are expected have prices discounts that are “between 10 and 30 percent of the pioneer products’ price,” the FTC said in its report, available here.

Shortly after report’s publication, President Barack Obama mentioned in a speech to the American Medical Association that creating a pathway at the FDA for approving generic biotech drugs would save the United States “billions of dollars.” But, as Arlene Weintraub was quick to point out in BusinessWeek, “How many billions? And how fast would those savings be achieved?”

With the advent of biotech generics, or follow-on biologics (FOBs), an impact on the economy is guaranteed, albeit unquantifiable. Industry insiders highlight that the biotech sector also stands to undergo some immeasurable changes itself.

“I am worried that the generic biotech companies make it less attractive to innovate,” said Mouli Cohen, entrepreneur and founder of Voltage Capital, a private equity innovation fund. Cohen’s firm invests in biotech startups and added, “Innovation and the ability to drive the process towards quantifiable outcomes is the hallmark of business in the U.S. Cannibalizing this process could reduce us to a mediocre player.”

Indeed, as PharmaTimes noted in reporting on the June 11 hearing by the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, concerns have risen as to whether or not innovator biotech companies will be able to recoup their Research and Development investments, were FOBs were permitted to “come speedily to market.”

“R&D is increasingly expensive,” Cohen said. “The major pharmaceutical companies have reduced their efforts. This shifts the burden onto biotech and academia. In the end, someone or some entity has to sponsor the work. The cost will shift, but just like the medical system, the industry will break down if the compensation and the regulatory constraints become increasingly unfavorable.”

This means that biotech, although recently predicted by EvaluatePharma to achieve the largest growth of the any drug industry over the next five years, faces some massive obstacles in terms of funding.

“Two thirds of the future clinical pipeline for patients resides in small biotech companies – companies without profits, companies relying heavily on

Want to Live Extra Years?