Bio­science in­dus­try stake­hold­er col­lab­o­ra­tion key to ad­dress­ing in­equal­i­ty

Biotech Voices is a collection of exclusive opinion editorials from some of the leading voices in biopharma on the biggest industry questions today. Think you have a voice that should be heard? Reach out to senior editors Kyle Blankenship and Amber Tong.

When a glob­al pan­dem­ic hit, the bio­science in­dus­try an­swered the call for vac­cines and ther­a­pies in record time, which will save mil­lions of lives. This re­sponse was pos­si­ble be­cause of a sus­tained in­vest­ment of risk-cap­i­tal by the ven­ture cap­i­tal in­dus­try in life sci­ences com­pa­nies, peak­ing in 2020. Great sci­en­tists, vi­sion­ary lead­er­ship and high-qual­i­ty in­vestors that backed new sci­ence and bold en­tre­pre­neurs led to the in­no­v­a­tive tech­nolo­gies of BioN­Tech and Mod­er­na that con­tributed to the ini­tial Covid-19 vac­cines.

As the sec­tor right­ly basks in the glow of this year’s ac­com­plish­ments, there is a con­cur­rent re­al­i­ty to con­front. Covid-19 has fur­ther ex­posed the in­equities in so­ci­ety, dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly im­pact­ing women and mi­nori­ties. This im­bal­ance is al­so ev­i­dent in the bio­science com­mu­ni­ty, pro­vok­ing many lead­ers to act on in­equal­i­ty.

Ven­ture cap­i­tal­ists find­ing rea­sons to change

The ven­ture cap­i­tal in­dus­try, not on­ly with­in life sci­ences, has well-doc­u­ment­ed chal­lenges with di­ver­si­ty, eq­ui­ty and in­clu­sion. On­ly 2.6% of to­tal VC fund­ing in 2020 has gone to Black and Lat­inx founders, and fund­ing for fe­male founders has sunk to lev­els not seen since 2017. De­spite that, I per­ceive a grow­ing ap­petite for change. The ques­tion is – How?

In VC firms, the low at­tri­tion of in­vest­ment part­ners and the lim­it­ed ex­pan­sion of firms lim­its ca­reer op­por­tu­ni­ties for the many tal­ent­ed As­so­ci­ates and Prin­ci­pals that rep­re­sent the fu­ture. With no vis­i­ble route to part­ner, these em­ploy­ees seek op­por­tu­ni­ty else­where, out­side ven­ture cap­i­tal. The loss of such tal­ent re­duces the chance to in­tro­duce more di­ver­si­ty among a ven­ture firm’s part­ner ranks.

A lack of di­ver­si­ty among VCs great­ly in­flu­ences in­vest­ment de­ci­sions and cap­i­tal al­lo­ca­tion. For ex­am­ple, re­search shows how in­ter­ac­tions with in­vestors dif­fer be­tween men and women en­tre­pre­neurs (We Ask Men to Win and Women Not to Lose: Clos­ing the Gen­der Gap in Start­up Fund­ing. Kanze, Huang, Con­ley and Hig­gins). The ques­tions di­rect­ed at men ex­plore the size and mag­ni­tude of the op­por­tu­ni­ty. In con­trast, women are more like­ly to be ques­tioned about pre­ven­tion fac­tors and down-side risk.

Cre­at­ing a new com­pa­ny in life sci­ences, and grow­ing it, in­vari­ably re­lies on ven­ture fi­nance. VC firms have a strong in­flu­ence over the com­pa­ny build­ing process, in­clud­ing the com­po­si­tion of boards and se­nior man­age­ment, as well as the tal­ent and cul­ture. In­suf­fi­cient di­ver­si­ty among ven­ture in­vestors can lim­it a port­fo­lio com­pa­ny’s com­pet­i­tive­ness in the tal­ent mar­ket be­cause di­verse can­di­dates se­lect em­ploy­ers where they see them­selves rep­re­sent­ed and suc­cess­ful. Just 3% of VC in­vest­ing part­ners are racial or eth­nic mi­nori­ties and around 11% are women. This leads to an ex­ist­ing bias among VCs to­wards his­tor­i­cal suc­cess pat­terns, which has been to the detri­ment of mi­nori­ties and women.

Pri­vate com­pa­nies re­act to pub­lic mar­ket re­quire­ments

The re­cent Nas­daq pro­pos­als to the SEC on board di­ver­si­ty and dis­clo­sure, along­side new state laws and reg­u­la­tions, are forc­ing many pub­lic com­pa­nies to be­come more di­verse. Mean­while, pri­vate com­pa­nies in the bio­science sec­tor re­main strong­ly in­flu­enced by ven­ture in­vestors who many per­ceive as pas­sive re­gard­ing di­ver­si­ty and in­clu­sion.

The in­ter­play be­tween ven­ture in­vestors and port­fo­lio com­pa­nies is a source of great op­por­tu­ni­ty to ad­vance DE&I in the sec­tor. In­creas­ing di­ver­si­ty will cre­ate val­ue for all stake­hold­ers, and re­duce the fric­tion points as com­pa­nies tran­si­tion from pri­vate ven­ture own­er­ship to the pub­lic mar­kets. Chang­ing the com­po­si­tion of the board and the man­age­ment team takes time and en­er­gy and can cause a com­pa­ny to lose vi­tal mo­men­tum. Cul­ture is of­ten seed­ed ear­ly in a com­pa­ny’s life and pos­i­tive­ly ad­dress­ing cul­ture from the get-go re­duces the need for cul­tur­al cor­rec­tions as a com­pa­ny ma­tures.

The pow­er of the col­lec­tive

For small com­pa­nies, with­out the ex­per­tise and hu­man cap­i­tal, the in­tent to im­ple­ment DE&I prac­tices, tools and poli­cies of­ten fails. Prac­tices bor­rowed from large in­ter­na­tion­al com­pa­nies are not rou­tine­ly ef­fec­tive ei­ther.

The range and com­plex­i­ty of DE&I is­sues com­pa­nies need to tack­le, make the task daunt­ing and com­pli­cat­ed. In­stead of or­ga­ni­za­tions in­di­vid­u­al­ly piec­ing to­geth­er a DE&I strat­e­gy, con­stituents have an op­por­tu­ni­ty to work col­lab­o­ra­tive­ly and pre-com­pet­i­tive­ly to de­vel­op DE&I so­lu­tions that are de­signed for the op­er­a­tional re­quire­ments of ven­ture cap­i­tal firms and ven­ture-backed pri­vate com­pa­nies. The Bio­science & In­vestor In­clu­sion Group (BI­IG) is one such op­por­tu­ni­ty (www.bioin­clu­sion.org).

Bio­science & In­vestor In­clu­sion Group chan­nels col­lec­tive com­mu­ni­ty ac­tion; some­thing the bio­science sec­tor does well. BI­IG en­ables com­pa­nies and in­di­vid­u­als to con­tribute their per­spec­tive or ex­pe­ri­ence to struc­tured work­ing groups ini­tial­ly pri­or­i­tiz­ing In­vestor In­ter­ac­tions; Hir­ing and On­board­ing, and Peo­ple Growth and Re­ten­tion. The DE&I so­lu­tions BI­IG de­vel­ops will be freely ac­ces­si­ble to help ad­vance and ac­cel­er­ate DE&I in the in­dus­try.

When in­vestors and en­tre­pre­neurs link arms in the face of chal­leng­ing prob­lems, they are ca­pa­ble of re­mark­able achieve­ments. This uni­ty and the open and col­lab­o­ra­tive spir­it of the bio­science com­mu­ni­ty can tack­le an­oth­er big prob­lem the sec­tor must con­front — in­equal­i­ty.

Karl Simp­son is the CEO of Lift­stream and a founder of The Bio­science & In­vestor In­clu­sion Group.

Biotech Voic­es is a con­tributed col­umn from se­lect End­points News read­ers. Read more here.

Qual­i­ty Con­trol in Cell and Gene Ther­a­py – What’s Re­al­ly at Stake?

In early 2021, Bluebird Bio was forced to suspend clinical trials of its gene therapy for sickle cell disease after two patients in the trial developed cancer. As company scientists rushed to assess whether there was any causal link between the therapy and the cancer cases, Bluebird’s stock value plummeted – as did those of multiple other biopharma companies developing similar therapies.

While investigations concluded that the gene therapy was unlikely to have caused cancer, investors and the public may be more skittish regarding the safety of gene and cell therapies after this episode. This recent example highlights how delicate the fields of cell and gene therapy remain today, even as they show great promise.

Chris Gibson (Photo By Vaughn Ridley/Sportsfile for Web Summit via Getty Images)

Re­cur­sion founders gin for­tunes as IPO back­ers show­er $436M on one of the biggest boasts in AI -- based on some very small deals

In the AI drug development world, boasting often comes with the territory. Yet few can rival Recursion when it comes to claiming the lead role in what company execs like to call the industrialization of drug development, with promises of continued exponential growth in the number of drugs it has in the pipeline.

On Friday, the Salt Lake City-based biotech translated its unicorn-sized boasts into a killer IPO, pricing more than 24 million shares at the high end of its range and bringing in $436 million — with a large chunk of that promised by some deep-pocket backers.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

UP­DAT­ED: New Kaiser analy­sis shows how lim­it­ing price ne­go­ti­a­tions to tar­get­ed drugs may bet­ter fo­cus up­com­ing leg­is­la­tion

As Congress considers whether to adopt sweeping new legislation to lower prescription drug prices across the board, the Kaiser Family Foundation is out with a new report on Monday showing how a more targeted approach on a subset of drugs might be a more efficient way to save government funds.

“This analysis shows that Medicare Part D and Part B spending is highly concentrated among a relatively small share of covered drugs, mainly those without generic or biosimilar competitors,” wrote Juliette Cubanski, deputy director of the program on Medicare policy at KFF, and Tricia Neuman, SVP of KFF. “Focusing drug price negotiation or reference pricing on a subset of drugs that account for a disproportionate share of spending would be an efficient use of administrative resources, though it would also leave some potential savings on the table.”

Tillman Gerngross (Adagio)

Till­man Gern­gross' Covid-19 an­ti­body moon­shot scores $336M with the help of new ace CFO. Is an IPO next?

Less than a year into its existence, serial biotech entrepreneur Tillman Gerngross’ antibody play Adagio has raced ahead into a pivotal trial for its lead drug for Covid-19 on the back of some very promising preclinical data. Now, crossover investors led by Peter Kolchinsky at RA are rolling up the Brinks truck — and that could spell an IPO in the offing for Adagio.

Adagio has bagged $336 million as part of a Series C round led by RA Capital to advance lead single-shot antibody ADG20 through a pivotal Phase I/II/III trial for the treatment of mild to moderate Covid-19 patients at high risk of infection, the biotech said Monday.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 107,200+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

When is a drug re­al­ly a de­vice? Court knocks down FDA ap­peal in try­ing to sort that grey area

It’s always a surprise when a court has to step in to tell the FDA that it erred in performing one of its main duties: classifying whether a medical product is drug or a device.

But that’s what the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia did on Friday, making clear to the world’s top drug regulator that Genus Medical Technologies’ contrast agent barium sulfate (also known as Vanilla SilQ) should not be considered a drug, as the FDA had said, but a medical device.

Q1: A flood of in­vestor cash drove biotech's num­bers to new record highs, and the tor­rent of cash is mov­ing up­stream fast

If you thought biotech was booming last year, wait until you get a load of the numbers from Q1 2021.

On virtually every level, with one exception, the money engine was working around the clock in the first 3 months of this year. Venture capital has reached such a fever peak that the average B round now weighs in at an average mega-weight value of $100 million. The money flow is also finding its way to the mouth of the R&D river, where discovery work now merits the big bucks instead of cautionary seed funds.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

Jami Rubin (EQRx)

Ja­mi Ru­bin, once fa­bled for grilling bio­phar­ma ex­ecs, de­camps to head fi­nance at drug pric­ing dis­rupter

As Goldman Sachs’ top pharmaceutical analyst, Jami Rubin was known for asking the tough questions. Now, as she takes the lead on EQRx’s mission to rewrite the rules of drug pricing, we’ll see how good her answers are.

Rubin made the jump to biotech on April 5, becoming EQRx’s new CFO, the company said Monday. She’s coming from PJT Partners, where she’s been a partner providing strategic guidance for biotech and pharmaceutical companies for the last couple years. With EQRx’s recent $500 million Series B round in the books, it wouldn’t be a surprise if she was already lining up a public debut.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 107,200+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Seagen gets Au­gust PDU­FA for Pad­cev ex­pan­sions; Adap­tate pulls in new cash for gam­ma delta T cell an­ti­bod­ies

Seagen is riding the wave of two new priority reviews straight to the FDA.

The Bothell, WA-based biotech and their partners at Astellas announced Monday that two supplemental BLAs for Padcev had been accepted by US regulators. FDA has set Aug. 17 as the PDUFA date for the reviews.

“With our recent regulatory submissions, we intend to provide the highest level of clinical evidence supporting Padcev use — overall survival data from a randomized Phase III trial — and expand availability in multiple countries where there is unmet medical need,” said Astellas oncology chief Andrew Krivoshik.

Ben Carson (Evan Vucci, AP Images)

UP­DAT­ED The doc­tor is in: Trump in­sid­er Ben Car­son joins NASH play­er Galectin as a 'spe­cial con­sul­tant,' part-time spokesman

In the few short months since President Donald Trump left office, his former department heads are reportedly having a difficult time finding employment. But for Ben Carson, Trump’s former housing secretary, that’s not a problem anymore after biotech came calling.

Carson, a former GOP presidential candidate and erstwhile HUD head, has joined Galectin Therapeutics as a “special consultant” the biotech hopes will help raise its profile and provide an entrée to key business partnerships, the company said Monday.