Image by Eran Kampf via FlickrEnlight Biosciences might just be the sign of new times. Over the past few years, several pharma companies have come together on a number of efforts, e.g. the Critical Path Institute. I’ve heard enough people in senior positions in pharma talk about the need to share pre-competitive information over the past couple of years to believe that an apparent move to co-develop, or at least invest in technologies that are unlikely to give a company a competitive advantage, has some legs.
The part that troubles me a little. It’s a lot of the old guard, albeits a ton of heavyweights. I don’t get the mental image of some of the sharpest minds of the world, including some of the younger, more thirsty, scientists, together somewhere in a facility in Kendall Square, dreaming up solutions to some of the problems that are faced across the pharma industry.
Also, the investment (around $39 million) by the three big pharma companies is fairly small, so they aren’t taking a huge risk either. Another concern is a lack of clarity on the long term business model. Will pre-competitive data be available as Open Data? How do they plan to commercialize any discoveries?
While I might sound a mite cynical, I hope something good comes out of this. Even if only one or two innovations that make a big dent on bringing out better, safer, drugs come out over the next 5-10 years, the company should be considered a success.
That said, a constant theme on this blog is precisely the lack of innovative technological platforms. Why has the venture community not given the development of these platforms a chance? Personally, despite the challenges, we need to think about new models to develop such platforms, whether via public/private partnerships or microfunded projects. Enlight seems to be in the former category, so will be interesting to see how it evolves.
Industry Watching: Pharma looks at new ways to innovate
The scientific weight behind Enlight makes an impressive list, as does the list of pharma partners, and the areas of interest (a little too broad and general if you ask me). It looks like their current focus is on in vivo imaging.
The part that troubles me a little. It’s a lot of the old guard, albeits a ton of heavyweights. I don’t get the mental image of some of the sharpest minds of the world, including some of the younger, more thirsty, scientists, together somewhere in a facility in Kendall Square, dreaming up solutions to some of the problems that are faced across the pharma industry.
Also, the investment (around $39 million) by the three big pharma companies is fairly small, so they aren’t taking a huge risk either. Another concern is a lack of clarity on the long term business model. Will pre-competitive data be available as Open Data? How do they plan to commercialize any discoveries?
While I might sound a mite cynical, I hope something good comes out of this. Even if only one or two innovations that make a big dent on bringing out better, safer, drugs come out over the next 5-10 years, the company should be considered a success.
That said, a constant theme on this blog is precisely the lack of innovative technological platforms. Why has the venture community not given the development of these platforms a chance? Personally, despite the challenges, we need to think about new models to develop such platforms, whether via public/private partnerships or microfunded projects. Enlight seems to be in the former category, so will be interesting to see how it evolves.
Further reading:
Continuing thoughts on innovation models