These 300(+) Biotech Twit­ter cit­i­zens are the quick­est to tweet news


Like many of you, I have a com­pli­cat­ed re­la­tion­ship with Twit­ter. I don’t feel good at it, but here I am ob­sess­ing over it. I re­sent feel­ing like I need to be good at it. That’s a bad way to feel about a re­la­tion­ship you’ve been in for sev­en years.

Your friends have more friends than you do — this is the rub of so­cial net­work­ing. There isn’t a pro­fes­sion­al I know who is proud of the small size of their Rolodex. It’s no won­der so many in bio­phar­ma join Twit­ter on­ly to aban­don it af­ter a few tweets. The de­fault state of their new ac­count ad­ver­tis­es to the world that no­body at all fol­lows what you have to say. That doesn’t feel good ei­ther.

If you work in­side bio­phar­ma, I’ll ad­mit there’s not much rea­son for you to post to Twit­ter. Yes, there are ex­cep­tions and many en­joy a rich­er ca­reer as a re­sult. But it’s not true for a big ma­jor­i­ty. Most knowl­edge in bio­phar­ma is held in the minds and ex­pe­ri­ences of peo­ple and com­pa­nies. These are not shared in pub­lic.

The beau­ty of Twit­ter is that you don’t have to say any­thing at all.

Read-on­ly Twit­ter

The dirty se­cret of Twit­ter is that it’s de­pen­dent on jour­nal­ists and pro­fes­sion­al con­tent-cre­ators. We go to Face­book to see time­lines of our friends and fam­i­ly. LinkedIn time­lines on­ly mat­ter if you’re on a job hunt or re­cruit­ing peo­ple your­self.

Se­ri­ous news hounds turn to Twit­ter be­cause it’s the on­ly se­ri­ous place to craft a hard news time­line. And it turns out “read-on­ly Twit­ter” is quite an amaz­ing prod­uct. When you tune in­to the con­ver­sa­tions of oth­ers, you learn things you didn’t know you need­ed to know.

Jour­nal­ists, brands, and bots all rush to post con­tent the mo­ment it’s fit for con­sump­tion. Some links have legs, oth­ers don’t. It’s an op­er­at­ing sys­tem for the dis­sem­i­na­tion of news and the meta-com­men­tary that fol­lows. This is the top of the pub­lic in­fo pyra­mid. From here these things fil­ter down­stream to the 80% of the in­dus­try who have no re­la­tion­ship with Twit­ter.

Plug­ging your ear in­to the top of this nerve cen­ter gets you clos­er and faster to this in­for­ma­tion. Whether this in­for­ma­tion is good or bad, that’s for you to de­cide. Like the tele­phone game, where you tell some­one some­thing and it changes down­stream, your in­for­ma­tion is pur­er the clos­er it was to the sig­nal. It’s with­out the col­or. No ana­log degra­da­tion.

Too much noise

Hav­ing asym­met­ric in­for­ma­tion is a huge ad­van­tage in busi­ness, right? You know some­thing some­body else doesn’t, and they don’t have ac­cess to those bit of in­fo. This is how it worked in 1990.

In 2016 you can pos­sess asym­met­ric in­for­ma­tion that’s freely avail­able to all, but was lost in the dig­i­tal ether of tweets, press re­leas­es, al­go­spam, and Na­tive Ӓd­ver­tis­ing. In­for­ma­tion is eas­i­ly buried in the con­tent swamp. You just can’t see it all.

Now there’s plen­ty of firms who’ll charge a $10,000 month­ly re­tain­er to sift through these tweets, trav­el ob­scure parts of the web, trav­el be­hind the pay­walls, send you a sum­ma­ry, make sure things don’t fall through the cracks. A few lucky bio­phar­ma ex­ec­u­tives en­joy these perks.

What if you’re brand new to bio­phar­ma? How about if you’re a sea­soned vet but just new to Twit­ter? How do you know who to fol­low? Twit­ter for all in­tents and pur­pos­es is a con­sumer brand. De­spite it be­ing a rich, im­me­di­ate source of in­for­ma­tion for drug de­vel­op­ers, Twit­ter the com­pa­ny has no prod­ucts to on­board such a niche au­di­ence.

We love Twit­ter at End­points and want more peo­ple in bio­phar­ma to en­joy the ben­e­fits of it — even as a pro­fes­sion­al lurk­er.

In­tro­duc­ing Mar­co, our news­bot

Last Au­gust we qui­et­ly launched our vi­ral news­bot@endpts. We re­cent­ly named it Mar­co — con­stant­ly ex­plor­ing BioTwit­ter.

It’s job is to:

  • Search for links in every tweet made in a known uni­verse of thou­sands of BioTwit­ter ac­counts;
  • Cal­cu­late the ve­loc­i­ty of each link shared;
  • If a link starts mov­ing much faster rel­a­tive to oth­er links, it’s now trend­ing;
    • Mar­co then vis­its the link it­self and ex­tracts the head­line, au­thor, and source. We want our own, in­de­pen­dent in­for­ma­tion about the link.
  • Mar­co then tweets the link. It gives cred­it with a hat tip [h/t] to the ac­count that it saw tweet the link first.

It’s that last part that forms the ba­sis of this spe­cial re­port: who was the first per­son to re­port this news?

Mar­co has been read­ing BioTwit­ter 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for al­most a a year now. Over this time we can ag­gre­gate the hat tips Mar­co doled out and come up with this ex­act list.

We guar­an­tee if you fol­low a healthy seg­ment of this list — you’re plugged in­to to heart of the link econ­o­my on BioTwit­ter.

What this list is not

Any­time you rank your friends and col­leagues there’s bound to be hard feel­ings. So let me state for the record:

  • This is not a list of the best ac­counts to fol­low in BioTwit­ter. Many tweeps nev­er post links and in­stead con­tribute with con­text and analy­sis. Mar­co is a few tech­no­log­i­cal rev­o­lu­tions away from be­ing able to un­der­stand when some­one is be­ing sar­cas­tic or help­ful, so it ig­nores text-on­ly tweets. And that’s of­ten the best part of Twit­ter.
  • This is not a who’s who list. There are plen­ty of those around and none of them do any­thing for the per­son who sim­ply wants to be the best pro­fes­sion­al lurk­er on BioTwit­ter.
  • There are no val­ue judge­ments here. This is a pure­ly da­ta-dri­ven list. Yes, it’s our own pro­pri­ety da­ta and I’m not like­ly to di­vulge the ex­act man­ner in which we re­duce the fire­hose of BioTwit­ter in­to a trick­le. But we’re pre­sent­ing the da­ta as-is.


Biotech Twit­ter cit­i­zens most fre­quent­ly cred­it­ed with post­ing trend­ing links first

Over 100 hat tips
John­Cendpts
Fierce­Biotech
Bio­S­tocks
brad­lon­car
Andy­Biotech
adamfeuer­stein
matthe­wher­p­er
phar­malot
Er­ic­Topol
Ben­the­Fi­dler
Fier­cePhar­ma

 

50 – 99 hat tips
Derek­lowe
megtir­rell
Ja­cob­Pli­eth
Mav­er­ick­NY
cru­sadernz
Scrip­Don­naDC
Bos­Biz­Don
ld­tim­mer­man
busi­ness
jonathanrock­off
Reuters_Health
3NT
CGrantWSJ
ste­faniei
LifeSciVC

 

20 – 49 hat tips
Arm­strong­Drew
BioRunUp
reuters­Ben­Hir
Biotech­World
John_LaMat­ti­na
Na­ture­News
car­dio­brief
Lof­tus
an­to­niore­gal­a­do
Jean­neWhalen
ivanoran­sky
Zachary­Bren­nan
Car­o­lineYLChen
AKAarsalan
Emi­ly­W­Fierce
DShay­witz
Black­Swan­Phar­ma
Wrigley­Tom
kris­ten_hal­lam
GideonGil
Bio­DueDili­gence
Reuters­Biz
Car­ly­H­Fierce
WSJbusi­ness
phar­magos­sip
TST­biotech
jq1234t
scrip­news
ZTrac­er
alexlash
ar­lenewein­traub
IPOtweet
WS­JA­sia
bio_clouse­au
FDALawyers
NPRHealth
ByJon­Gard­ner
charlesorn­stein
FDAad­comm
cafephar­ma
PDRen­nert
WSJ
lisam­jarvis
edy­ong209
NE­JM
ju­liaoftoron­to
rplenge
denis­eroland
lo­mu_j

 

At least 10 hat tips
techre­view
Boston­Globe
Reuters
pk­noepfler
WSJhealth
Lau­ra­LandroWSJ
porte­feuille­fun
El­y­se­Tanouye
sdbn
an­drew_ward1
TomBur­ton­WSJ
Ac­tivist­Shorts
Fay­Cortez
Biotech­News
dg­macarthur
dr­bachin­sky
Na­ture­Biotech
zbiotech
cells_nnm
Fes­tivus159
iito­Life­Science
skathire
medtech_ma
US_FDA
genen­tech
DewDili­gence
RNA­i­An­a­lyst
cray­ton_h
FT
vox­dot­com
Scrip­Mandy
car­lz­im­mer
vir­gini­ahugh­es
dhovekamp42
Alec­Gaffney
NYTHealth
PhilSer­afi­no
hmkyale
steveus­din1
fdalaw­blog
The­At­lantic
Scot­tKirsner
IAmBiotech
stem­cel­las­says
TheStal­wart
Trade­Hawk
Bio­Break­out
an­naed­ney
politi­co
ddi­a­mond
sxbe­gle
Frank_S_David
CMichael­Gib­son
Mogu­lAzam
Dr­MiguelPerales
ScripEleanor
Bio­Cen­tu­ry
brentl­saun­ders
rleu­ty_biotech
michael_mezher
ProP­ub­li­ca
rick­berke
Gan­tosJ
Dan­Bud­wick
Phar­ma­ceu­ticBen
FierceMed­Dev
sci­en­tre
srq­s­tock­pick­er
CN­BC

 

At least 4 hat tips
joe­walk­er­WSJ
ethanjweiss
23alo­ha
forbeshealth
GlobeR­obW
EMA_News
sci­ences­can­ner
Ope­nOut­crier
Mike­Huck­man
big3bio­BOS
davies­bj
Mer­ck
mt­md­phd
Drchik23
Med­ical­News
SA_Health­In­vest
db­sable
dan­pri­mack
an­naw­math­ews
guardian­science
Med­ical­New­sUSA
taralach
eval­u­atephar­ma
Ram­sey_Bagh­da­di
westr
ze­ro­hedge
Liq­uid_Biop­sy
Lin_ling_88
dsobek
Ai­ims1742
DrAD­Kline
JNapo­dano
BioWorld
LizSz­abo
BI_Sci­ence
TechCrunch
US­ATO­DAY
not­So­JunkD­NA
ideaphar­ma
Mar­tin­Shkre­li
Evavon­Schaper
mau­reen­m­far­rell
Car­olynyjohn­son
BioTerp
cb­tad­vi­sors
bm­snews
Al­ny­lam
at­ti­cusMB
fund­Duchenne
SashaDamouni
Tim­mer­man­Re­port
bbchealth
bmj_lat­est
Fier­cePhar­mA­sia
biotech­day
FDA_Drug_In­fo
Prop­Thinker
No­var­tis­S­cience
matt_levine
blsuth
FDA­Me­dia
News­from­Science
Sud­han­vaRaj
FiveThir­tyEight
vlad33301
dami­an­garde
BlinkX90
sandiego­science
Mykalt45
Adam­Singer
ScottGot­tlieb­MD
Don­WNi­chol­son
Grady­For­rer
AS­CO
Davi­dAStein­berg
RPM­Re­port­Mike
sloan_ket­ter­ing
Hum­bleBio­Trad­er
JA­MA_cur­rent
Chillz­Trad­ing
SueD­Hell­mann
jay­brad­ner
daph­ne­zo­har
Vikas­Dan­dekarET
cd­weaver
bh­munos
SIRF_Re­port
mslopat­to
michaelscal­ly
michael_gilman
Dougal­lan1
prince­tongb
Drug­Patent­Watch
chris­sy­farr
Za­ck­foot
ma­ki_ki­ta­mu­ra
jfli­er
Life­SciencesMkt
wilbanks
He­len­Bran­swell
afrakt
rt­narch
Ogut_Ozgur
aman­dam­ick­lus
walidgel­lad
smhedge­cock
iBo­nanos
PearlF
jtozz
maryn­m­ck
Dr­Jen­Gunter
Boston_Biotech
broad­in­sti­tute
ES­chat­tner
pi­car­don­health
ScripLu­cie
can­cer­doc­NYC
Xcon­o­my
No­var­tis
hrana
BioWriter­Chik
Nick­PaulTay­lor
WHO
phar­ma­con­nect
myger­sh­berg
gau­tamkol­lu
An­a­lyst­Wire
Econ­SciTech
EP­Clin­i­cal­Tri­al
Bio­Med­Track­er
pe­ter­bach­md
Caulfield­Tim
Mar­i­lyn­Mann
John_Hemp­ton
mbeisen
John­PLeonard­MD
charles_ga­ba
aleszuba­jak
Black­Hawk­Trad­er
JCM­c­Crack­en
Break­ingNews
jodi­gral­nick
eye­onf­da
Robert­Langreth
berna­tolle
cel­lec­tis
Kathy­Giusti
RS_Flinn
Arthur­Ca­plan
bertha­coombs
Lym­phoma_Doc
aaronecar­roll
NIH
NYTScience
Street_In­sid­er
David­Ju­urlink
Na­tRevDrugDisc
ac­taest­fab­u­laXX
23Chromz
EP­Van­tage
Fast­Com­pa­ny
Mau­riceOn­TW
An­nemarieVtW
biotech­baumer
ewan­bir­ney
Jack­West­MD
On­col­o­gy­Times
at­lasven­ture
JPZaragoza1
BioWino
RNA_Biotech
John­Tuck­er­PhD
Col­fax­Cap­i­tal
si­mon­bay­ly
NBC­New­sHealth
fw­phar­ma
In­natePhar­ma
Er­icP­Fierce
thinkgenome
AC­In­vestor­Blog
AlpineBV_Miller
HaertlG
Scrip­Mike­Ward
Roche
at­ul­butte
Na­tureMed­i­cine
Image courtesy of The Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson.

Pro­tect­ing the glob­al phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal in­no­va­tion ecosys­tem – what’s at stake?

We are living in a new era of healthcare that is rapidly advancing progress impacting patient outcomes and experiences. We’ve seen a remarkable pace of transformational innovation, applied research, and advanced clinical development over the last decade.

Despite this tremendous progress, there is much more work to be done, and patients are counting on us – now more than ever – to continue that momentum. At the heart of our industry is a focus on developing and delivering medicines for some of the world’s most challenging diseases, including those that have few or no effective treatments today.

End­points 20(+2) un­der 40, 2023; Bio­phar­ma's high­est-paid CEOs; N-of-1 CRISPR sto­ry goes on af­ter tragedy; and more

Welcome back to Endpoints Weekly, your review of the week’s top biopharma headlines. Want this in your inbox every Saturday morning? Current Endpoints readers can visit their reader profile to add Endpoints Weekly. New to Endpoints? Sign up here.

We will be off Monday in observance of Memorial Day — and when we get back, it will be a straight march to ASCO, BIO and more. Enjoy the (long) weekend!

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

The 20(+2) un­der 40: Your guide to the next gen­er­a­tion of biotech lead­ers

This year’s list of 20 biotech leaders under the age of 40 includes a huge range of ambitions. Some of our honorees are planning to create the next big drug giant. Others are pushing the bounds of AI. One is working to revolutionize TB testing. All are compelling talents who are still young in age, but already far along in achievement.

And, as in years past, we went over. The 20 are actually 22 because of two double profiles that reflect how important teamwork is in the industry. As one of our honorees, Joe Illingworth of DJS Antibodies, told me in our interview, “It takes a village to raise a biotech.”

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Rich Horgan (R) with his late brother, Terry

Rich Hor­gan spear­head­ed a gene ther­a­py for his broth­er. The tri­al end­ed in tragedy, but the work con­tin­ues for more pa­tients

Rich Horgan’s quest to create a custom gene therapy for his brother, Terry, ended in tragedy. But Horgan doesn’t believe it’s the end of the story.

Terry, a 27-year-old patient with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, died last October just eight days after receiving the therapy in a clinical trial in which he was the only participant. The case raised questions about the safety of certain gene therapies and what would happen to other drug programs under a nonprofit that Horgan created, called Cure Rare Disease.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Bio­phar­ma's 20 high­est-paid CEOs of 2022, each bring­ing in $20M+ pay­days

Even in a down year for much of the biopharma market, 20 CEOs brought in pay packages valued at more than $20 million, an Endpoints News analysis found.

Endpoints collected data on more than 350 CEO compensation packages, covering a wide range of pharma, biotech, and life sciences companies. All told, the 20 largest earners made over $725 million in 2022 — an average package of $36.4 million. Three brought in paydays over $50 million, and one CEO broke the $100 million mark.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Mi­rati’s drug sitra­va­tinib flops PhI­II in com­bo with Op­di­vo for cer­tain lung can­cer

Mirati Therapeutics’ path to a second drug approval will likely have to wait. The San Diego biotech company said Wednesday that its investigational lung cancer drug failed a Phase III trial testing it in combination with Bristol Myers Squibb’s Opdivo.

The drug, sitravatinib, and Opdivo weren’t better than the chemo drug docetaxel at keeping patients alive, Mirati said in a press release. The spectrum-selective kinase inhibitor missed the primary goal of overall survival in patients with second- or third-line advanced non-squamous, non-small cell lung cancer.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

FDA ap­proves Lex­i­con’s heart-fail­ure drug af­ter de­feat in di­a­betes

The FDA on Friday approved Lexicon’s heart failure drug sotagliflozin following a string of setbacks for the pharma company, including an FDA rejection in diabetes and the loss of a development deal with Sanofi.

The dual SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibitor will be marketed as Inpefa and is a once-daily tablet. It’s been approved to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death and heart failure-related hospitalization or urgent visits in adults with heart failure or type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and other cardiovascular risk factors. The label spans the range of left ventricular ejection fraction, including preserved ejection fraction and reduced ejection fraction, as well as patients with or without diabetes, Lexicon said Friday.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Eu­ro­pean Com­mis­sion to re­ceive few­er Pfiz­er-BioN­Tech vac­cine dos­es un­der amend­ed con­tract

The European Commission has made a few changes to its vaccine contract with Pfizer and BioNTech, reducing the dose volume while extending the delivery timeline to cope with “evolving public health needs.”

The Commission previously struck a contract in May 2021 for 900 million doses, with the option to purchase another 900 million. Of those, 450 million were expected to be delivered in 2023, though an amendment now calls for fewer doses. While neither the Commission nor Pfizer and BioNTech have revealed an exact amount, an unnamed source told Reuters that the amendment reduces the remaining expected doses by about a third.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Teresa Bitetti, Takeda's president of the global oncology business unit

Take­da wins pri­or­i­ty re­view for $400M col­orec­tal can­cer drug, li­censed from Hutchmed in Jan­u­ary

Takeda and Hutchmed scored a priority review Thursday afternoon for a colorectal cancer drug, the companies announced.

The experimental drug in question is fruquintinib, previously approved in China in 2018 to treat metastatic colorectal cancer. Takeda and Hutchmed are aiming to bring fruquintinib to the US and other countries outside China in the same indication, and the FDA set its decision date for Nov. 30 of this year.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 170,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.