Andreas Kaepplein

Alvotech is aiming to bring a number of new products to global markets in the coming months. Today we were very pleased to announce Alvotech's latest marketing approval in Europe, of our first biosimilar in ophthalmology. We are working with strong commercial partners such as Advanz Pharma, STADA (DE) and Biogaran (FR). Together we aim to increase access to cost-effective vision-protective care for millions of patients in Europe. This is just the latest step in Alvotech's ongoing mission, to broaden access to vital biologic medicines globally. Biosimilars bring down the cost of biologic medicine and support the sustainability of our healthcare systems, freeing up resources for further advances and breakthroughs in therapy. #betteraccess #betterlives #Europe Alvotech's press release: https://ow.ly/2ESA50WJKw0

389

14 Kommentare

In the biotech world, the early phase determines success or failure But the figures are alarming: 2023 biotech start-ups in Germany received just 203 million euros in early-stage funding. This is the lowest figure in the last six years - and well below the average of 325 million euros. → 24 er Zahlen For comparison: In the USA, several billion US dollars are invested in biotech start-ups in the seed and Series A phase every year. In 2023 alone, the volume was over 14 billion US dollars. What does that mean in concrete terms? Many start-ups do not fail because of the science. They fail because they run out of money before they can develop their product to market maturity. Early-stage financing is the bottleneck. Because this is precisely where it is decided whether we promote innovation in Europe OR whether it migrates. ➡️ What do I think is needed? Specialized early-stage funds for biotech. The biotech sector has different dynamics to traditional tech start-ups. Research takes longer, is more capital-intensive and riskier. Investors who understand these mechanisms are needed. Public co-investment programs must be a must-have. The state must act as an anchor investor to mobilize private capital. Tax incentives for early-stage investors are also essential. Those who invest in high-risk innovations should be rewarded with tax incentives. It is important to note that early-stage financing is not a subsidy. It is the prerequisite for turning cutting-edge European research into commercial success. If we do not close this funding gap, we in Europe will have to continue to watch our innovations grow in the USA.

212

20 Kommentare

Roche just bet $420M on a small UK biotech - no products, no human trial data. Just ONE platform that convinced them. Here’s why this move signals the future of drug development: First, the context. Roche is valued at nearly $200B. It generated $66B in revenue last year and is a global leader in immunology. In 2023, it paid $7.1B upfront for a late-stage bowel disease drug. On Sept 2, Roche’s Genentech unit licensed a preclinical program from Omass Therapeutics: $20M upfront. Up to $400M in milestones. Tiered royalties if commercialized. For a drug that hasn’t entered human trials. So why? Because Roche isn’t just buying a drug. It’s buying access to OdyssION, Omass’ discovery engine, a platform designed to study proteins in their native ecosystem. That means higher fidelity and fewer dead-end programs. This matters most in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD): Nearly 8M people worldwide live with Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis. Even with TL1A antibodies dominating headlines (AbbVie, Merck, Pfizer), the unmet need is still massive. Roche wants multiple shots on goal. Look at the portfolio play: • Afimkibart (anti-TL1A) → Phase 3 blockbuster bet • Omass program → early-stage option with a differentiated mechanism This isn’t random. It’s hedging across timelines and science. For Omass, this is validation. Founded in 2016 from Oxford research, it built tech that retains protein interactions inside the mass spectrometer, a notoriously tricky feat. Now Genentech has endorsed it with a deal worth up to $420M. Here's the thing: This is how modern pharma constructs franchises: Not just buying winners, but layering early-stage platforms that expand optionality. It’s less about chasing hype, more about building risk-balanced portfolios. Here's the lesson for biotech leaders: Modern pharma isn’t chasing single winners. It’s building risk-balanced portfolios by layering early-stage platforms. Not hype-chasing, future-proofing. You don’t need Phase 3 data to land transformative deals. If your platform solves a discovery bottleneck: fidelity, precision, delivery, Big Pharma will pay. Omass just proved it. 3 takeaways from this deal: • Platform > single product • Hedge across timelines, not just assets • Optionality is now strategic currency And Roche is showing how to build a franchise that lasts. Biotech deal flow and market trends are complex, but approachable with the right guidance. At Kybora.com, we support leaders navigating these challenges with authentic, insightful content. Follow me for more on biotech M&A, market shifts, & strategy.

458

29 Kommentare

I’m energized by the compelling data emerging around BioNTech SE BNT113 in head and neck cancer treatment. Coupled with recent investor conversations, it’s clear there’s real momentum behind the shift toward in vivo immunotherapy. By programming the immune system directly within the body, this approach promises to streamline production and logistics—potentially delivering transformative care at a dramatically lower cost than traditional cell and gene therapies. To put things in perspective: developing a typical cell or gene therapy today can cost upwards of US $1.9 billion from R&D through clinical trials. And that’s just R&D, Cost of goods/manufacturing alone for a gene therapy can be between $500,000 and $1 million. In contrast, true in vivo approaches (which bypass ex-vivo cell manipulation and personalized manufacturing) could dramatically reduce costs and broaden accessibility. BNT113 exemplifies this potential—a solution that could be cheaper, scalable, and faster to deploy. I’m excited to see how this innovation reshapes the therapeutic landscape—and thrilled to be part of this conversation in making immunotherapy more efficient and accessible. References: https://lnkd.in/exCJK4t8 https://www.genengnews.com

81

6 Kommentare

FUTURE TRENDS IN CELL AND GENE THERAPY (2026–2030): CRISIS, OPPORTUNITY OR BOTH?/ After a turbulent 2024–25, I kept getting the same question: where does cell & gene therapy go next? This position paper tries to summarize a pragmatic roadmap for founders and investors. Our perspective is informed by recent experience, including our exit from Esobiotec (acquired by AstraZeneca). Thesis: The next five years will be shaped by four forces — in vivo delivery, cost curves (CMC), access policy, and China — with AI powering design, manufacturing, and clinical execution. From 2026 onward, expect fewer but “shocking” wins that reset expectations. What’s changing: ● From hype to hard problems. CAR‑T and gene therapy delivered real cures, now the frontier is solid tumors, larger genes, and scalable delivery. ● In vivo moves center stage. Recent landmark deals signal that editing or programming cells inside the body will define the next platform wave. ● Cost curves bend. Rapid CAR‑T (7–10 days), point‑of‑care manufacturing, and automated QC turn CMC into a core moat. ● Access vs. innovation finds rules. Hospital exemptions and right‑to‑try expansions will force clearer coexistence between academic access and commercial pathways. ● China changes the price and pace. Massive trial volume and lower costs put global pressure on CGT pricing, and open new cross‑border development routes. ● AI becomes non‑optional. From target and capsid design to bioreactor control and trial ops, AI is now a competitive baseline. Investor playbook 1️⃣ Back delivery (in vivo & non‑viral): the platforms that scale beyond bespoke products. 2️⃣ Build CMC + data moats: speed, reliability, and AI‑driven manufacturing as first‑order strategy. 3️⃣ Globalize early, design for access: partner with leading hospitals, plan China/EU routes, and align incentives (outcomes‑based models). Inside the paper you’ll find a 1‑page landscape map (p.1), a deal & signal table (p.9), and concrete takeaways for teams navigating the next cycle. 👉 Download/print the full paper: https://lnkd.in/dqzZX7ZX #celltherapy #genetherapy #biotech #venturecapital #AIinBiotech #CMC

746

32 Kommentare

As evitria AG is owned by private equity Patricia Industries, it is always interesting to analyze what other PE backed investments are going on in that area. I have compiled a full overview of transactions affecting #CDMOs in my article in BioPlan Associates, Inc. 22nd Annual Report and Survey of Biopharmaceutical Manufacturing Capacity and Production https://lnkd.in/eNSFgrMB. Thank you Donnie E. Gillespie to include me again in this industry leading documentation full of interesting facts and statistics. The survey collected extremely valuable data and is regarded as the industrial reference - just to name a few interesting examples here: For instance, it is reported that ≥90% of the world’s mammalian cell culture capacity is utilized for #antibody production, or that the average titer of commercial scale mAb production is still relatively low at 3.1 g/L and 3.9 g/L overall for all development stages – far away from individual cases with titers in the 8-12 g/L range. Therefore, it is not surprising to see that “improving the production titer” ranked second in factors to reduce COGS. Interestingly the average cost for recombinant proteins was ~300 $/g, although almost 25% of the analyzed facilities could achieve costs below 100 $/g. However, costs of >100 K$ annually per antibody treatment are not necessarily related to expensive manufacturing, but rather to high and frequent doses. But check it out yourself to find other interesting facts about bioprocessing.

34

10 Kommentare

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗥𝗡𝗔 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗜𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹—𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝗚𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 From Riyadh to Rwanda, Shanghai to São Paulo, the mRNA sector is no longer U.S.-centric. At the recent Alliance for mRNA Medicines conference, panelists shared how regions around the world are doubling down on infrastructure, talent, and clinical trial capacity. The message was clear: innovation is borderless, and collaboration is the new competitive edge. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗼𝘂𝘁: 𝗠𝗶𝗱𝗱𝗹𝗲 𝗘𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗺: Saudi Arabia is investing billions into biotech hubs, building on decades of RNA research. 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲’𝘀 𝗽𝘂𝘀𝗵: Strong regulatory support and non-dilutive funding, but growth capital remains a bottleneck. 𝗖𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗮’𝘀 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗱: Fast approvals, deep funding, and a focus on personalized cancer vaccines and in vivo CAR-T. 𝗔𝗣𝗔𝗖’𝘀 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲: Australia, Singapore, and South Korea are emerging as RNA innovation leaders. 𝗟𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻 𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮 & 𝗔𝗳𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮: New manufacturing hubs and vaccine self-sufficiency are driving regional growth. 𝗨.𝗦. 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗯𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Still a powerhouse, but facing regulatory uncertainty and shifting investor expectations. The mRNA sector is no longer defined by borders—it's being shaped by bold moves, fresh capital, and regional ambition. Whether you're scaling trials, scouting partnerships, or rethinking your global footprint, the landscape is 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁. 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘨𝘭𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘧𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘨𝘺? Many thanks to the panelists for their insights: Clay Alspach, Morrie Ruffin, James Nolan, Yihang Chen, Khalid S. A. Khabar & Miroslav Gasparek #ASCENT #mRNA #Global #nanomedicine #advancedtherapies

69

T-cell engagers – is it all about affinity? TCEs have been a revolution in oncology, particularly blood cancers but also recently in solid tumors. The basic idea is you have a bispecific drug that binds to a T-cell with one arm (typically via CD3) and a tumor antigen with the other. This forms a connection (synapse) between the cells, causing the T-cell to be activated and kill the cancer. Straight forward in theory, less so in practice! The first generation of TCEs bound CD3 with high affinity and led to significant cytokine release syndrome in patients. There was a need for better drugs balancing potency and safety. In 2003 it was reported that the threshold to activate T-cell killing was distinct and more sensitive than the threshold for cytokine release. In other words, there was a sweet spot for potency with reduced side effects. A Goldilocks zone! Over the past 15 years there have been a number of reports on TCEs with reduced affinity to CD3. Some are even starting to show promise in the clinic but what does reduced affinity mean? This seems to be as mythical as a fairy tale. Reports seem to claim anything from double digit nanomolar to micromolar binding. On a monthly basis I get requests to humanize CD3 antibodies often with an additional note to “reduce affinity to X nM”. But is it really that simple? Should we just be building standardized CD3 binders and using them plug-and-play for all purposes? Biology is rarely this simple! Christian Klein and colleagues have just published an excellent opinion piece on this topic. Well worth a read for anyone designing TCEs. Link in first comment. What people often seem to forget is you don’t just have to balance binding to CD3e but also the tumour antigen (TA). The epitope on the TA will have an impact on the optimal CD3 affinity, as well as the geometry required to form the optimal synapse. A recent study analysing structures and synapse formation showed that equivalent potency depends on contact distance and flexibility. Optimal killing can be achieved with formats that mediate close contact with high flexibility or far contact with low flexibility. However, few papers have done a head-to-head assessment of the interdependence of both CD3 and TA affinity. This perhaps marks the start of the 3rd wave of TCEs, where a more holistic approach is taken to optimization of all components in the puzzle rather than just CD3 affinity. TCEs in autoimmune disease are also starting to take off. If we want to develop the best possible TCEs across all antigens and indications we need to learn from Goldilocks and identify the TCE that is “just right” for the particular application. ----- I'm Ian, I post about antibody engineering, recombinant proteins and my journey to bootstrap Gamma Proteins into a leading supplier of Fc receptors. If you like my content please reshare with your network and follow me to see more.

667

78 Kommentare

The biopharma industry is entering a new era of strategic #manufacturing realignment, and the scale of investment speaks volumes. The US–EU trade agreement announced in late July includes a 15% tariff on pharmaceutical imports. While implementation is pending the Section 232 investigation, expected to conclude in August, we’re seeing the continued acceleration of massive investments in domestic manufacturing as companies hedge against long-term policy and supply chain risk. Leading companies are making historic investments to strengthen domestic #supplychains, reduce geopolitical risk, and safeguard long-term patient access. Here’s what’s unfolding: - AstraZeneca: $50B commitment, including its largest-ever manufacturing hub in Virginia - Roche: $50B investment across multiple US states, creating 12,000+ jobs and expanding capabilities in gene therapy and glucose monitoring - Eli Lilly and Company: $27B to build four US “mega sites,” with two dedicated to synthetic chemistries for APIs—a critical capability long dominated by China - Biogen: $2B to expand its North Carolina footprint, reinforcing global supply resilience - Merck: $12B invested since 2017, with $9B more planned by 2028 These investments represent structural realignments in response to policy volatility and a growing recognition that manufacturing must be resilient, secure, and geographically aligned with patient needs. The current moment demands ingenuity in the design, location, and scalability of our manufacturing infrastructure.

40

4 Kommentare

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝗹 — 𝗶𝘁’𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻𝗲. In most biotech and pharma companies, #B𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴D𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 usually means 𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 — collaborations, royalties, valuation models. That’s essential work, but it’s only half the story. #𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗕𝗗 — what happens as a product nears approval or enters the market — is a different discipline. It’s where assumptions give way to execution. In #𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨, we 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴: forecasts, discount rates, scenarios. In 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘉𝘋, we 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴: supply chains, pricing, launch timing, payor access, distribution. It’s no longer about how to split value but how to #𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳 it. 🔍 𝗧𝗵𝗲 “𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺” Health Advances once wrote a piece that still resonates: “𝗢𝗻𝗲-𝗛𝗶𝘁 𝗪𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 — 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺 𝗶𝗻 𝗕𝗶𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵.” Many biotechs succeed once but stumble on the second product because they stay optimized for 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘭-𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨, not 𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴-𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨. They master partnerships but not launches--didn't bridge strategy and execution. That’s where the partnership between the 𝗖𝗵𝗶𝗲𝗳 𝗕𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗢𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿 and 𝗖𝗵𝗶𝗲𝗳 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗢𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿 becomes defining. The CBO brings the 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘪𝘯 — anticipating what partners and payors need. The CCO brings the 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘵 — ensuring science and strategy reach patients. When they work in sync, 𝘀𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 impactful 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀. When they don’t, companies risk confusing activity for progress. The best organizations share one lens — 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦. Because at the end of the day, the product is where science, strategy, and patient value meet. 🚀 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗗 𝗦𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 Commercial BD often begins two years before approval — during launch planning — when BD supports commercial teams on launch strategy and readiness, access, ITM (in-the-market) vs. TTM (to-the-market) pathways, and real-time insights to shape future BD priorities. At that point, #BD becomes #operational, financial, and mission-critical. 🙏 𝗔 𝗡𝗼𝘁𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗸𝘀 I learned many of these lessons early from exceptional leaders who shaped how I think: Anthony C. Hooper (Tony) (𝗔𝗺𝗴𝗲𝗻) — every deal must serve patients, not spreadsheets; D. Mark McClung (𝗔𝗺𝗴𝗲𝗻) — connect strategy with field reality; Jeff Ajer (𝗕𝗶𝗼𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻) — commercial discipline and compassion can coexist. Their #mentorship grounded my belief that in biotech, 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻 — scientist, BD lead, or C-suite alike. Because a “deal” makes a headline. A “launch” builds a company. https://lnkd.in/etf5tfMt

92

5 Kommentare

Thank you to Nathalie Schober-Ladani and Shayesteh Fürst-Ladani for inviting me to the Medtech & Pharma Platform Association 2025 conference. My 5 Key Takeaways from the Conference: 1. Embrace Deep Patient-Centricity and Co-design from Day One: Innovation in digital health and combined products must move beyond merely listening to what patients say they want and instead delve into why they want it, uncovering their true needs. Patient involvement should be early, continuous, and on an "eye level" to achieve more relevant and inclusive results. 2. Prioritize Human Factors and Usability Engineering for Real-World Success: The ultimate success of medical devices, especially combined products, hinges on their usability and human factors. R&D must design systems to fit the user, rather than forcing the user to adapt. 3. Navigate and Advocate for Regulatory Pragmatism and Harmonization: The regulatory landscape for combined products is complex and fragmented, creating significant hurdles for market access and innovation. R&D leaders should actively seek and leverage opportunities for simplification and harmonization across different regions (e.g., FDA, EU, Swissmedic), including work-sharing initiatives and "one-stop shop" approaches for approvals and post-market activities. 4. Develop Strategic Data Utilization and Real-World Evidence (RWE) Generation: Connected devices offer tremendous opportunities for aggregating and repurposing real-world data to address unmet needs and deliver mutual value. However, R&D needs to ask the right questions to ensure data collection measures what truly matters in a patient's life, reflecting their priorities and adding to quality of life or independence, rather than just counting easily measurable steps. 5. Invest in Education and Cultural Transformation for Effective Patient Involvement & AI adoption: To move beyond just talking about patient involvement or AI adoption, R&D organizations need to be ready to educate themselves and invest time and resources into formal training on methodological approaches for engaging patients meaningfully or appropriately using AI. Embedding co-design as a standard practice requires a cultural shift and a commitment to understanding how to involve patients & other stakeholders. Malte Kladiwa, Nathalie Schober-Ladani, Smruthi P., Ruth Foster, Thomas Wejs Møller, Philipp Richard, Steven (Steve) Bourke, Nicole Gusset, Marcello Milano, Andrew Shirra, Ivo Schauwecker, Dr. Fatima Sanfourche, PhD, Karoline Mathys Badertscher, Andreas Emmendoerffer, MD, PhD, Ditte Zerlang Andersen, Theresa Jeary, Marta Carnielli, James Bertram, Antonella Baron, Carlos Galamba, Dr. Heike Möhlig-Zuttermeister, David Haerry, Dr. Lukas Engelberger, Jack Cronk, PhD, Adrian Sutter

43

3 Kommentare

🧬BioTechX EU is the place to stay updated on trends in digital transformation in #Biopharma! Here is what I saw this year: ✔️ #LLMs are a dominating theme! Capabilities are impressive, but the real impact remains a challenge: implementation is not an issue - adaptation is. This is not a surpice - I have written about this in my most recent medium post: when data science team operates as a service agency inside the organization, the impact will remain limited. ✔️ Overbooked "#AI in clinical trials" section with queue outside to get in, and barely 20 people in "#Bioinformatics Tools" section even at the #Nextflow/Seqera presentation (except when it was about clinical trials). With scarce funding, Biopharma pour the little resources they have into optimizing /innovating in the most critical step - clinical development, trying to get out of the "Valley-of-Death". Preprocessing the data is not the bottleneck, a more critical question is: ❓What data should we collect/buy and how to convert it into a clear endpoint/ Go-No Go decision? ✔️Solutions with more immediate operational impact are at the forefront of consideration for Biopharma decision makers. On a personal note, it was absolutely great to meet some old friends, and make some new! Thank you Anne Ulvestad, MSc MBA 🌍💡🧬 for sharing the only photo I got from #biotechX this year, it was great to catch up about your work in marketing biotech in Nordic and EU and how you transform the strategy for #biotech, #medtech and others. The conference season is not over though! Next week - ESMO - European Society for Medical Oncology congress in #Berlin! #esmo #esmo2025

28

4 Kommentare