From L-R: Marc Tessier-Lavigne, Bob Nelsen, David Baker and Vik Bajaj

Ex­clu­sive: In $1B+ bet on AI, bio­phar­ma heavy­weights back new start­up to up­end drug R&D

A star-stud­ded mix of ven­ture cap­i­tal­ists and sci­en­tists, backed by more than a bil­lion dol­lars, is launch­ing an am­bi­tious biotech that aims to rein­vent drug R&D us­ing ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gence, the group ex­clu­sive­ly told End­points News.

The com­pa­ny, Xaira Ther­a­peu­tics, is one of this year’s most rich­ly fund­ed new com­pa­nies, not on­ly in biotech but across the start­up world, re­flect­ing the en­thu­si­asm and tech­no­log­i­cal progress in us­ing AI to un­lock the mys­ter­ies of bi­ol­o­gy. The group has tapped Marc Tessier-Lav­i­gne, for­mer­ly the pres­i­dent of Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty and chief sci­en­tif­ic of­fi­cer of Genen­tech, as CEO to turn a cash-flush vi­sion in­to re­al­i­ty.

“AI is go­ing to trans­form every step of the drug dis­cov­ery process,” Tessier-Lav­i­gne said in an in­ter­view with End­points. “At the very least, every­body would agree it’s go­ing to im­prove things in­cre­men­tal­ly: 10% here, 20% there, 30%. You mul­ti­ply all of that out and you could get two-, three-fold im­prove­ments in speed and suc­cess rates.”

Drug R&D is an en­deav­or rife with fail­ure — com­mon­ly cit­ed fig­ures es­ti­mate that on­ly about 10% of drugs that make it to hu­man test­ing are ever ap­proved, and a far greater share fail be­fore ever be­ing test­ed in a per­son. Xaira and sev­er­al oth­er new biotechs be­lieve they can change that with new gen­er­a­tive AI meth­ods that can de­sign com­plex mol­e­cules from scratch, find new tar­gets, and cut months or even years from the process.

Much of the new start­up’s tech­nol­o­gy comes from the Uni­ver­si­ty of Wash­ing­ton’s In­sti­tute for Pro­tein De­sign, the leg­endary pro­tein sci­ence lab run by Xaira co-founder David Bak­er. Sev­er­al sci­en­tists from Bak­er’s lab who helped de­vel­op mod­els to de­sign an­ti­bod­ies and oth­er pro­tein-based drugs have joined Xaira full-time.

The com­pa­ny, which has about 50 em­ploy­ees to­day at sites in Seat­tle and Cal­i­for­nia, was co-found­ed by two of biotech’s biggest ven­ture cap­i­tal­ists, Bob Nelsen of ARCH Ven­ture Part­ners and Vik Ba­jaj at Fore­site Labs, an in­cu­ba­tor af­fil­i­at­ed with Fore­site Cap­i­tal. Oth­er in­vestors in­clude F-Prime Cap­i­tal, NEA, Se­quoia Cap­i­tal, Lux Cap­i­tal, Light­speed Ven­ture Part­ners, Men­lo Ven­tures, Two Sig­ma Ven­tures, and SV An­gel.

Us­ing AI to make drugs isn’t a new idea. In­vestors have poured hun­dreds of mil­lions of dol­lars in­to ear­li­er star­tups with lit­tle to show for it so far. And many sci­en­tists re­main deeply skep­ti­cal that so-called de no­vo an­ti­body gen­er­a­tion — us­ing com­put­ers to de­sign brand new pro­teins — is ma­ture enough for mak­ing med­i­cines. But Xaira’s lead­ers say they’re con­fi­dent it’s ready for prime time.

“We be­lieve the tech­nol­o­gy is ready for mak­ing ther­a­peu­tics to­day,” Tessier-Lav­i­gne said. “We think it’s go­ing to get bet­ter and bet­ter.”

Along with the high-pro­file ex­ec­u­tive team, Xaira’s board is full of stars who have climbed to the high­est ranks in the reg­u­la­to­ry, sci­en­tif­ic, and cor­po­rate worlds that shape the in­dus­try Xaira plans to rein­vent. Board mem­bers in­clude for­mer FDA head Scott Got­tlieb, Stan­ford chemist and No­bel lau­re­ate Car­olyn Bertozzi, and for­mer John­son & John­son CEO Alex Gorsky.

Xaira’s fund­ing makes it an in­stant leader among the newest gen­er­a­tion of lead­ing AI biotechs, along­side Al­pha­bet’s Iso­mor­phic Labs and Flag­ship Pi­o­neer­ing’s Gen­er­ate:Bio­med­i­cines.

All three are ad­vanc­ing their own AI mod­els to ei­ther pre­dict the com­plex three-di­men­sion­al struc­tures of pro­teins or gen­er­ate new pro­teins en­tire­ly, both of which are cru­cial start­ing points for de­sign­ing new drugs. Iso­mor­phic CEO Demis Has­s­abis has talked of “reimag­in­ing drug dis­cov­ery from first prin­ci­ples us­ing com­pu­ta­tion­al meth­ods,” most re­cent­ly part­ner­ing with phar­ma gi­ants Eli Lil­ly and No­var­tis. Gen­er­ate has raised near­ly $750 mil­lion and built a pipeline of 17 pro­tein-based drugs, with plans to add 10 more an­nu­al­ly.

Xaira, which was in­cor­po­rat­ed last May and went by the name Ori­on Med­i­cines while in stealth, is set­ting its ini­tial sights fur­ther. The com­pa­ny wants to ap­ply AI across three ar­eas: dis­cov­er­ing new bi­ol­o­gy, de­sign­ing mol­e­cules, and run­ning clin­i­cal tri­als.

“We’ve all been kind of wait­ing for the mo­ment where we could re­think this fair­ly in­ef­fi­cient, some may even ar­gue bro­ken, in­dus­try that has low sin­gle-dig­it suc­cess rates and some­times makes med­i­cines that are cu­ra­tive, but a lot of times doesn’t,” ARCH’s Nelsen said in an in­ter­view with End­points.

“What we don’t want to do is change just one lit­tle ver­ti­cal si­lo,” Nelsen said. “We can think — and have the re­sources to think — hor­i­zon­tal­ly about the whole sys­tem.”

'Ma­chines that dri­ve bi­ol­o­gy'

To bet­ter un­der­stand bi­ol­o­gy and hunt for new drug tar­gets, Xaira has brought in teams and tech­nolo­gies from the ge­net­ic se­quenc­ing gi­ant Il­lu­mi­na as well as the biotech start­up In­ter­line Ther­a­peu­tics fo­cused on the hot sci­ence of pro­teomics, how pro­teins change in health and dis­ease.

“Pro­teins are the mol­e­c­u­lar ma­chines that dri­ve bi­ol­o­gy. They are the tar­gets of the vast ma­jor­i­ty of drugs,” said Don Kirk­patrick, a for­mer In­ter­line leader and now a vice pres­i­dent at Xaira. “And they will end up be­ing the bio­mark­ers that in many cas­es we will pur­sue to un­der­stand when a mol­e­cule is work­ing or not.”

Kirk­patrick’s group is fo­cused on run­ning per­tur­ba­tion ex­per­i­ments — dis­turb­ing genes, pro­teins, or path­ways in cells — at mas­sive scale to start es­tab­lish­ing causal links be­tween a drug tar­get and a bi­o­log­i­cal out­come. The goal is to build a foun­da­tion­al AI mod­el from these da­ta that un­der­stands what goes wrong in a dis­ease, and how to fix it.

To make ac­tu­al drug can­di­dates, Xaira will ad­vance AI mod­els de­vel­oped in Bak­er’s lab called RFd­if­fu­sion and its spe­cial­ized suc­ces­sor RFan­ti­body — re­vealed in an aca­d­e­m­ic preprint last month.

These com­put­er pro­grams are sim­i­lar to the dif­fu­sion mod­els that pow­er im­age gen­er­a­tors like Ope­nAI’s DALL-E. But in­stead of con­coct­ing art or a pho­to based on a text prompt, Bak­er’s mod­els can cre­ate mol­e­c­u­lar struc­tures of built-to-pur­pose pro­teins, such as an­ti­bod­ies that neu­tral­ize a virus or kill can­cer cells.

His­tor­i­cal­ly, there’s been a fair amount of luck in­volved in dis­cov­er­ing an­ti­bod­ies, which are of­ten sourced from the blood of mice or peo­ple. Us­ing AI to de­sign the drugs could al­low re­searchers to hone in on known weak points of a virus, can­cer cell or prob­lem­at­ic pro­tein that the im­mune sys­tem isn’t good at find­ing on its own.

“This idea of build­ing an­ti­bod­ies from scratch and get­ting hits out of nowhere, there re­al­ly hadn’t been a way to do that be­fore,” Bak­er said.

How­ev­er, oth­er ex­perts have said that the an­ti­bod­ies in Bak­er’s preprint were too weak to be­come good drugs and not­ed that the tar­gets in the pa­per were eas­i­er ones, in­clud­ing well-stud­ied coro­n­avirus and in­fluen­za pro­teins.

Tessier-Lav­i­gne was in­sis­tent that RFan­ti­body would get bet­ter with time, and that Xaira could use tra­di­tion­al an­ti­body en­gi­neer­ing ap­proach­es to re­fine what the com­put­er cre­ates. One of AI’s biggest ben­e­fits, he said, may be in gen­er­at­ing leads on an­ti­body drugs that are dif­fi­cult or im­pos­si­ble to make through the tra­di­tion­al luck-of-the-draw ap­proach­es.

Pipeline un­der wraps

And while many drugs fail be­cause the mol­e­cules are too weak or too tox­ic, oth­ers fail be­cause re­searchers chose the wrong group of pa­tients, or failed to se­lect the best clin­i­cal sig­nals to tell if a treat­ment works or not.

Fore­site’s Ba­jaj said Xaira’s clin­i­cal goal is to do for oth­er drugs what ge­net­ics did for on­col­o­gy — mov­ing the field from broad, tox­ic chemother­a­pies to tar­get­ed pre­ci­sion med­i­cines.

In can­cer, that strat­e­gy suc­ceed­ed be­cause many tu­mors are dri­ven by one or two ge­net­ic mu­ta­tions. Com­mon dis­eases, though, pose a far more daunt­ing chal­lenge, dri­ven by a dizzy­ing mix of en­vi­ron­men­tal and ge­net­ic con­trib­u­tors.

“We now have enough da­ta that we can ac­tu­al­ly ap­proach prob­lems like that and pre­dict, in an on­col­o­gy-like way, how peo­ple will re­spond to drugs that treat re­al­ly com­mon dis­ease,” he said.

And al­though Xaira is ini­tial­ly fo­cused on an­ti­body drugs, its lead­ers see no rea­son that its AI tools can’t be ap­plied to oth­er ther­a­peu­tic modal­i­ties in the fu­ture, like small mol­e­cules (though the com­pa­ny de­clined to share its ear­ly tar­gets or time­lines).

The CEO role is a new po­si­tion for Tessier-Lav­i­gne, who re­signed as Stan­ford's pres­i­dent last year amid a con­tro­ver­sy over sev­er­al old re­search pa­pers from his lab­o­ra­to­ry con­tain­ing ma­nip­u­lat­ed da­ta. Sev­er­al pa­pers with his name on them were cor­rect­ed or re­tract­ed. An in­ter­nal in­ves­ti­ga­tion found no ev­i­dence that Tessier-Lav­i­gne per­son­al­ly ma­nip­u­lat­ed da­ta or com­mit­ted fraud, but did out­line weak­ness­es in how he man­aged his lab­o­ra­to­ry.

When asked what he learned, Tessier-Lav­i­gne said that it's im­por­tant to not take da­ta at face val­ue. “That's cer­tain­ly a les­son I've tak­en to heart and am car­ry­ing for­ward,” he said, but he didn’t name any spe­cif­ic con­trols he would put in place at Xaira.

In the AI field, where hype and skep­ti­cism both find their zeniths, scruti­ny is sure to be high. Com­pa­nies have made big promis­es about us­ing AI to rev­o­lu­tion­ize drug dis­cov­ery be­fore – al­beit nev­er with this much mon­ey.

“We all be­came con­vinced that there was an enor­mous op­por­tu­ni­ty here to con­struct the next Re­gen­eron or Genen­tech, some­thing with the foun­da­tion­al tech­nolo­gies to­day,” Ba­jaj said. “They are no less im­por­tant than the foun­da­tion­al tech­nolo­gies that launched those com­pa­nies.”

AUTHORS

Andrew Dunn

Senior Biopharma Correspondent

Ryan Cross

Senior Science Correspondent