Former Tech VC & UK Minister of State for Science, Research, Technology & Innovation with responsibility for UK global investment & regulation of LifeScience, AgriTech, BioEngineering, Fusion, Quantum & Space.
Great to see the appointment of Patrick Vallance as Minister of State at Department for Science, Innovation and Technology by Keir Starmer10 Downing Street & my good friend Peter Kyle, the new Secretary of State.
Both appointments very good news for UK Science, Technology & Innovation & building on the successes of the last decade in advancing UK science & technology investment, commercialisation and global impact.
I couldn’t have hoped for a better successor: I’ve known & worked with Patrick as HMG Chief Scientific Adviser in my 5 Ministerial roles including as Minister for LifeScience and MoS for SciTech+Innovation, and in my previous career in LifeSci VC when he was at GSK
And he was instrumental alongside Kate Bingham & the #VaccineTaskForce in the UK success in Covid 🦠vaccine 💉development & roll-out.
👏🤝
These appointments bode well for stability and sensible policy making in relation to the UK’s research base. In practice, though, what Labour does to tackle the higher education funding crisis will surely be the greatest determinant of UK research success over the coming few years.
Former Tech VC & UK Minister of State for Science, Research, Technology & Innovation with responsibility for UK global investment & regulation of LifeScience, AgriTech, BioEngineering, Fusion, Quantum & Space.
Great to see the appointment of Patrick Vallance as Minister of State at Department for Science, Innovation and Technology by Keir Starmer10 Downing Street & my good friend Peter Kyle, the new Secretary of State.
Both appointments very good news for UK Science, Technology & Innovation & building on the successes of the last decade in advancing UK science & technology investment, commercialisation and global impact.
I couldn’t have hoped for a better successor: I’ve known & worked with Patrick as HMG Chief Scientific Adviser in my 5 Ministerial roles including as Minister for LifeScience and MoS for SciTech+Innovation, and in my previous career in LifeSci VC when he was at GSK
And he was instrumental alongside Kate Bingham & the #VaccineTaskForce in the UK success in Covid 🦠vaccine 💉development & roll-out.
👏🤝
🔬 Exploring the Landscape of Clinical Trials in Australia
Thank you, Matthew Britland, John Emmerson, Daniela Caiazza, Nik Zeps, Sophie Mepham PhD and Matt Zeller, for an interesting and comprehensive webinar today. Here are few key takeaways.
▶️ Pros:
🔹 High-Quality Environment: Australia is recognized as a safe, clean, and friendly country.
🔹 High-Quality Execution and Healthcare: Renowned for its leadership in nuclear medicine (e.g. Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, ANSTO) and great healthcare systems.
▶️ Cons:
🔹 Cost and Accessibility: High expenses and geographical remoteness pose significant challenges.
🔹 Demographic Limitations: A smaller population size complicates the scope of trials, especially for rare diseases.
▶️ Struggles:
🔹 Career Pathways for Research Coordinators: There's a pressing need for defined career progression for research coordinators, paralleling those for doctors and nurses, to aid in retention and motivation.
🔹 Decentralised Trials: Discussed as a solution to encourage broader participation without the need for extensive travel.
▶️ Innovative Aims:
🔹 National One-Stop Shop: A unified approach to streamline processes in clinical trials.
🔹 Panel Wishlist: Fast access to innovations, recognition and career advancement for trial coordinators, and a more harmonized regulatory framework.
This webinar highlights the potential and the hurdles in Australia's clinical trials landscape, urging a shift towards integrating research into everyday healthcare. I look forward to seeing how these discussions shape future policies and practices in healthcare research 🙌
#clinicaltrials#healthcareinnovation
When is $1 billion not enough? Find out in Council for Innovation Promotion Co-Chairs and former USPTO Directors Andrei Iancu and David Kappos' latest op-ed for Boston Herald!
"With any luck, #Congress will soon reauthorize the Pandemic All-Hazards and Preparedness Act, or #PAHPA, a crucial component of the U.S. response to biosecurity threats. As it does so, however, Congress should not replace the free market system for #innovation with a centralized big government management scheme.
#PAHPA funds the programs and institutions that fight public health emergencies. Current authorization expires at the end of September, which means time is of the essence to shore up this critical tool against #biohazards.
The Senate health committee, led by Senator Bernie Sanders, recently passed its version of the bill, moving it closer to a floor vote. But unfortunately, Sanders tacked on a provision that could blow up U.S. leadership in #healthcare#innovation.
Instead of using patents to reward and encourage #invention — as the U.S. has done with stunning success for over 200 years — Sanders wants the government to offer #prize money.
As former directors of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, we can promise that this plan would be devastating for the future of U.S. #leadership in #drug research. We know this because Sanders’ gambit has been tested centuries ago and well-studied more recently — by #economists at Bowdoin College, Harvard, and Stanford, among others. They’ve all rejected the notion that prize systems can replace the #incentives created by #patents..."
I find Senator Bernie Sanders proposal to end the granting of drug patents to be astonishing. Yes, pharma drug prices are too high in some cases. But there are other ways to regulate prices without destroying the US patent system. Because what Senator Sanders proposes is nothing less than the end of that system. The system has served us well since patents were provided for in the US Constitution.
How do you prohibit the patentability of one type of technology without it undermining protection for all technology? What exactly is a drug patent? When a patent application is filed with the USPTO, who decides whether its an attempt to patent a drug? What if the subject matter sought to be patented can be used in non- drug applications?. Will the USPTO’s determination be subject to judicial review? The questions are endless.
The rest of the countries in the world are trying to strengthen their patent systems. Only in the United States are we trying to weaken ours.
When is $1 billion not enough? Find out in Council for Innovation Promotion Co-Chairs and former USPTO Directors Andrei Iancu and David Kappos' latest op-ed for Boston Herald!
"With any luck, #Congress will soon reauthorize the Pandemic All-Hazards and Preparedness Act, or #PAHPA, a crucial component of the U.S. response to biosecurity threats. As it does so, however, Congress should not replace the free market system for #innovation with a centralized big government management scheme.
#PAHPA funds the programs and institutions that fight public health emergencies. Current authorization expires at the end of September, which means time is of the essence to shore up this critical tool against #biohazards.
The Senate health committee, led by Senator Bernie Sanders, recently passed its version of the bill, moving it closer to a floor vote. But unfortunately, Sanders tacked on a provision that could blow up U.S. leadership in #healthcare#innovation.
Instead of using patents to reward and encourage #invention — as the U.S. has done with stunning success for over 200 years — Sanders wants the government to offer #prize money.
As former directors of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, we can promise that this plan would be devastating for the future of U.S. #leadership in #drug research. We know this because Sanders’ gambit has been tested centuries ago and well-studied more recently — by #economists at Bowdoin College, Harvard, and Stanford, among others. They’ve all rejected the notion that prize systems can replace the #incentives created by #patents..."
If you have a spare moment today, do take a look at this 3-minute read where my General Manager Rippon Ubhi outlines the key challenges faced by the life sciences industry here in the UK.
The life sciences industry faces a critical 12 months. Our work helps improve the health and wealth of the nation, but the current policy and regulatory environment often inhibits this.
With the UK falling behind our global competitors on investment and clinical trial metrics and with a general election looming, now more than ever we need to make the case for our industry.
Read Sanofi’s view on the value that life sciences brings to the UK and how through positive change we can maximise the impact we have for patients: https://ow.ly/uSzC50PY0EE#SanofiUK
On the face of it the renaming of The Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson (phew!) to Johnson & Johnson Innovative Medicine simply better identifies pharma within J&J’s other businesses.
But I think we will come to see this as a much deeper change in creating health solutions based on their deep understanding of pharmacology and advanced engineering. Between medicines and devices is a world of possibility.
Very inspiring discussion at the pharma.be Clinical Trial Forum on Tuesday! The event centred on "Advancing Clinical Research in Belgium: Embracing Diversity & Equity in Clinical Trials", and our General Manager Marie-José Borst was a guest speaker at the panel discussion. ⬇️
🔈"At Roche, we advocate for the improvement of clinical trial recruitment, by stimulating efforts to increase clinical trial awareness such as the clinicaltrial.be platform and accelerating approval timelines, within the current regulatory framework."
She highlighted Belgium's strong track record in clinical trials and the recent challenges.
➡️ The attractiveness of 🇧🇪 as a trial location is driven by expertise in health, top research centers, existing real-life experience of investigators and short approval timelines - not to mention also that Belgium has particularly developed expertise in phase 1 trials.
❌ However, the new EU regulation introduced a harmonised approval process with fixed timelines for all European countries. This means that Belgium loses the advantage of having quick start-up timelines, which was always our standout advantage.
As an innovative company, Roche cares about the importance of clinical trials for the healthcare system. It is essential that we continue to keep Belgium attractive by:
🔬being open for innovation
📚diminishing the administrative burden
🧑⚕️overcoming patient recruitment challenges
Thanks for the inspirational afternoon pharma.be!
Caroline VenHugues MalonneNathalie LambotTessa Van MontfortDeloitteMitchell Silva, PhDRik VanhoofAna Carla Franch
Jean-pascal Machiels Nicky Van Der VekensSusan Tio, Ph.D.#health#gezondheid#sante#clinicaltrials
