Tailoring local innovation to fit the frame of big pharma

In the business of life science today, it seems that everyone is searching for that elusive buzzword that not only helps to best define what they do, but simultaneously separates them out from the herd while underlining their uniqueness in the ecosystem. And as soon as someone finds the right one, well, everyone else tends to jump on board, at best, and/or maybe even copies them, at worst. It's rather hard to be uniquely individual, it seems. 

One word which has been building momentum for some time has been "innovate" or "innovation" - both of which were quite liberally plastered on pavilion boards, placards and promotional material for various and varying organizations at the recent BIO meeting in Philadelphia. In fact, as noted in my last post, BIO itself now stands for the Biotechnology Innovation Convention. As trendy as it sounds, I personally find it somewhat redundant, particularly as it implies that something has changed. 

Maybe it has, and maybe it hasn't, as Ray McCooney would say! I think the word is (or should be) actually interlaced into the letters comprising biotechnology themselves, and biotechnology was always meant to be innovative, and less risk averse, than the purportedly much more conservative occupiers of the corridors of power at big pharma. They were classically the ones with the massive funds needed to take safer (a relative word!) bets through the clinic, while the much tighter budgets of biotech meant putting all your eggs in one (or two) baskets, taking a deep breath, and diving into the fray.

Being truly innovative is an extremely risky business, and one rarely has any degree of job security beyond where the last milestone payment stretches to, so it's quite a stressful endeavour also. I remember reading somewhere that in the early 2000s, Quebec had some 133 biotech-type companies, and after the economic crash in late 2008 and 2009, there were maybe a handful left. I lived that life and that particular rollercoaster, and while one can look back at it today as an irrational and passionate yet well-educated form of madness, it's probably true that I wouldn't change a thing either. 

But you know, as much as all of us probably remain convinced that we were all being incredibly creative and innovative, even back then, I think the problem is that we were (believe it or not!) ahead of our time. Biotech was being firmly innovative, but the problem was that until recently, big pharma was not! I lost count of the number of times we (or others I heard of) got criticised for not doing things the way pharma did, and occasionally facing outright refusal to even discuss exciting data because screening approaches or target identification-validation were not typically "pharma". 

There was a most definite disconnect between true innovation and old school traditional drug development ways of thinking. In many ways, innovation was the problem, in contrast to the glamorous bait being offered on the hook today. Why? Well, it seems to me that the disappointments that were the outcome of the huge initial promise in combinatorial chemistry and high throughput screening, and of the rather underwhelming (in terms of new drug discoveries) output of the sequencing of the human genome, actually were necessary to changing thinking at big pharma. The running dry of pipelines at major global pharma caused a crisis of such tsunami-level magnitude that a paradigm shift was bound to happen. As it did.

Lo and behold, and today pharma are reaching back further than they ever have before into the marbled hallways of the ivory towers of academia, searching for raw talent who very closely align with "innovation" - there's that word again! - those who are identifying and validating targets that have eluded big pharma. I think the point might be that while innovation was always there, previously the innovation that was being nurtured in academia (or even biotech) was not innovation tailored to the needs of pharma, and today there has been a significant migration between both ends of the spectrum - towards each other. 

It feels like there is more in common than ever before, and perhaps both groups have reached a degree of compromise in their singleminded pursuit of that innovation, with more fundamental researchers being willing to conduct research more fully focused on big pharma needs, and correspondingly, big pharma being willing to accept the usually less business-minded and more artistic idiosyncrasies of a star scientist who discovered a killer target or small molecule. Both parties have found a way to do business together, and perhaps that is the most innovative aspect of the current prominence of the word "innovation" in our business. 

So, as far as Quebec goes, nothing much has changed in terms of the province always having been a key strategic life science cluster and east coast biotech hub, but, probably more than ever, we are striving to conduct life science research that does have a significant socioeconomic and commercial impact for essentially everyone. Our job at AmorChem is to incubate truly innovative life science technologies in primarily academic institutions, and nurture-develop them in a fashion that directly feeds the interest and needs of large biotech and pharma with whom we converse. This venture capital conduit is designed to get risky opportunities across the valley of death and into the experienced hands of those who are the experts in preclinical and clinical development, and hopefully some make it beyond that to the marketplace. 

It's a very exciting time, and yes, unquestionably, innovation remains as important as ever, notwithstanding its newfound prominence in everyday life and work here in the province. While we still have a way to go, the burgeoning innovation that has always been at the heart of the province's life science research is re-nourishing the ecosystem; I think we can say that the phoenix has risen from the ashes, once again, and the future is looking very bright indeed. If we remain determined to focus on the truly innovative, then I think we will all be flying high again in the not too distant future. 

But right now? It's time for a mug of that equally innovative Emperor's Excellence Espresso from Ethiopia, reclining outside on a chaise longue on the sunny terrace!

A lesson learned - when BIO is at its best - you even have to schedule your bio breaks!

My mind is still somewhat in a haze after a whirlwind few days at the recent BIO 2015 convention in Philadelphia, but I will try to extract some useful thoughts from the aftershocks! First off, shortly after returning I heard that there is to be a name change for the event; one that reflects a key buzzword at Bio 2015 - innovation. So from now on, the acronym which most conveniently will not need to change will actually represent the Biotechnology Innovation Convention!

The move was announced by Ron Cohen, who is the new Chairman of the Board at BIO, at a keynote presentation given on June 17th at the convention: 

"I'm pleased to announce that the BIO Board has approved a change in BIO's name, from the Biotechnology Industry Organization to the Biotechnology Innovation Organization. Still BIO, but now with a name that better expresses the essence of what our member companies represent."

It's a good thing that "Innovation" begins with an "I" because BIO has become a brand name by now, and considering changing even the acronym could have caused the planets themselves to swap positions and we don't want that! Do we?! I personally don't really see the need for the name change because biotechnology, in and of itself, represents innovation at it's best (most of the time) and I kind of liked the "Industry" aspect, but that's just me. 

Hearing about innovation in Great Britain and Northern Ireland definitely made an expat feel at home. 

The 2015 BIO Exhibition was one impressive affair, with over 1,700 exhibitors spread out over a massive 160,000 square feet, including > 60 state, regional and national pavilions, which meant that for most, there was definitely a home-away-from-home feeling to being at BIO. The floor hosted literally thousands of organisations which included the top 25 big pharma, the leading large biotechs, the top 20 CROs/CMOs and > 300 academic institutions, among many others. 

Stopping by to say hello to Quebec and Canada during a rare break in the busy meeting schedule.

For us at AmorChem, it was three days of virtually non-stop partnering meetings from dawn to dusk - okay, I might be exaggerating just a little there, but you get my drift! - which is an extremely productive form of consecutive 20-30 minute speed-dating-for-life-scientists sessions, of which we had about 60 during the convention. By and large it's a very successful format, particularly when one is somewhat ruthless about both accepting and declining meeting invites in advance of BIO, so as to meet only primarily those parties who are as potentially interested in your company as one may be in theirs. Maximising the efficient use of everyone's valuable time is key to a successful BIO, in my opinion. 

Although you do come out of it at the end somewhat shell-shocked by the exciting roster of companies you got to interact with, I think perhaps the most important and satisfying aspect of it all is either putting faces to names you have dealt with by email or phone already, or getting to put faces to names right from the get-go of a new business relationship. As digital and virtual as our world has become, nothing truly beats the face-to-face sit-down situation where some genuine human warmth can add extra dimension to the more cold and clinical analysis/discussion of scientific data.

We definitely felt the benefit of that aspect in our various meetings, and we were delighted to add in some colour to those who were acquaintances we had never met prior to BIO 2015, as well as to make full-blown acquaintances with new potential business partners during the course of the three days. The only one downside to being so busy in the partnering sessions is that one has considerably less time to patrol the exhibition floor itself, or to attend various keynote speeches and presentations, but you cannot have it all, and our full schedule at BIO 2015 was very satisfying in that it underlines that we must be doing something right!  

There were some very cool receptions that were held in various locations in and around the Philadelphia Convention Center, including those by Johnson & Johnson, Roche-Genentech and the Exhibitor Hospitality Reception held in historic Reading Terminal Market, which included great munchies and even live music on the terrace outside. It was a wonderful way to end a hard day of networking and prospecting business partnerships, wandering around taking in the wonders of Reading Terminal Market and chatting with people one had met earlier in the day. 

Wonderful smells and sights at Reading Terminal Market, just across the street from BIO 2015.

All in all it was a magnificent experience, and if you have never been to BIO, you have to go at least once. We heard at the meeting that BIO 2016 is in glorious San Francisco, and that is a definite must-not-miss for so many reasons! We certainly will be there, and we very much look forward to renewing old acquaintances as well as making new ones, and by that time we hope to have closed our second fund, AmorChem II - so we expect to have even more candidate drug assets in our expanding portfolio - in the meantime, please keep an eye on us for new developments moving forward!

PS - I would be remiss if I did not point out that on the evening before BIO 2015 began for us, our friends and colleagues at ROBIC invited us for a wonderful dinner and evening in a private room at Zahav in Philadelphia - many thanks to them for a rather magnificent way to begin our visit; one which energised us for the days that followed!

Can you have both a KNOCK OUT and KNOCK IN victory? Yes - if you're AmorChem!

Christopher Hall with Jerel Davis, Luc Marengere, Fang Ni, Jennifer Hamilton, Brian Underdown

Apart from it being a week filled with Grand Prix fever here in Montreal, it was also a big week for those in the local life science community who participated in or attended our second KNOCK OUT event at the Hyatt Regency hotel in downtown Montreal. This event premiered at BioContact 2013 in Quebec city, and was a huge success, but for the second edition it was decided to bring the event closer to home which made it more accessible to the local scientific, biopharma and venture capital communities. 

In fact, the event was significantly expanded upon this year, whereby AmorChem collaborated with Lumira Capital to host the event, and we held both KNOCK OUT and KNOCK IN events side by side with the presentation of key portfolio companies funded by Lumira. This offered  a useful juxtaposition between current academic researchers vying for the big prize at KNOCK OUT, alongside more fully evolved science that either previously received AmorChem support (KNOCK IN), or had been founded into full-blown biotech companies by the team at Lumira. 

I found this to be a very interesting exercise in "compare and contrast", with perhaps the most significant impact being on those early stage researchers who got some very valuable education in what it takes to go from interesting academic science data, to attracting seed financing from a life science VC company such as AmorChem,  and then what needs to be achieved if one actually wants to go the distance and turn some interesting basic science into a full-blown biotech company.

The bottom line of KNOCK OUT is that academic researchers come in cold with no slides to lean on or fall back on, and they have mere minutes to present a project opportunity to our panel of heavyweights, who pick at them like feral hogs to see who is left standing at the end. The prize is of course the $500,000 financing on offer from AmorChem, but there is something for everyone, because all get priceless advice on what is missing to be the winner, and researchers can build on that for next time! 

KNOCK IN involves participants who have more fully evolved projects that have been supported by AmorChem funding, and these PIs are allowed some slides to tell their story in a few minutes and then face the rabid dogpack of industry veterans who tell them what big pharma would need to see to consider investing in their laboratory or in-licensing their technology. It can be a daunting prospect, but our fearless PIs faced the panel with aplomb and took the comments (both positive and negative) with experience and humility. 

The realities of the current life science and drug development scenario were not ignored by our tough team of industry heavyweights who handled both the KNOCK IN (photo at top) and KNOCK OUT (photo below) events, and they definitely exercised their right to hand out some tough love when critiquing the participants - but it was clearly underlined with a keen desire to help individuals realise the potential in their projects so that they might proceed to the next level. Even for a more mature project, the input from our panel can clearly be an eye-opener and bring feet firmly back to ground, when they dispense wisdom as to the likelihood of attracting a partner at that stage - but it is incredible exposure for the PIs involved, who get the luxury of serious input from such esteemed personalities in the business - for free!  

Rick Lesniewski, Aled Edwards, John Gillard, Lloyd Segal and Marie-Eve Cote

Something which definitely got my attention was a sentiment expressed by essentially all of our KNOCK OUT presenters when explaining what was needed to take things further, which came in the form of -

"Why we need AmorChem is because......" 

This is in effect what we have been saying in mirror image for a while now, in terms of the ecosystem clearly having a need for our type of early stage seed financing, which is emphasized not only by our expanding portfolio but also by an increasing level of interest towards us from the academic community. We have not sensed any drying-up of opportunity in the field, and rather have had to turn down various new projects being offered to us simply due to our need for a new financing round at AmorChem. 

In fact, given that we have vested our funds quite fully in our first round, we are in the process of raising awareness of this continuing need and how that translates into the necessity for our own need for refinancing. To hear individual PIs stating in public why they need AmorChem resonates strongly with us, but hopefully it also does with the various scientific players, pharmaceutical companies, venture capital and institutional investors, as well as governmental stakeholders, who were listening. 

Quebec life science is alive and well, and this is a time to expand on what has been rebuilt and exploit the considerable opportunity that exists in the labs of various entrepreneurially minded life science researchers. AmorChem exists to help some of those researchers get from very fundamental research into an early stage development pipeline that is increasingly garnering attention from big pharma. This fits quite perfectly with the current trend in pharma to reach further backwards into academia for new drug development candidates for their own pipelines. 

The numerous requests for invites and attendance on the day itself represent a solid underlining of the need/demand for our presence in the local ecosystem, and we think that the demand for seed financing is growing steadily as word of AmorChem has spread and academic scientists become more familiar with (and perhaps less wary of!) our model. We are extremely proud of what we have achieved with a certain level of funding thus far, and we are more excited than ever with the idea of expanding our operations with a second new round of financing. 

Unquestionably, the success of our AmorChem-Lumira event this week is testament to our impact to date in the local ecosystem, as well as shining a bright light on future possibilities moving forward. The various heavyweights on our panels, as well as those present in the audience, indicates the core support and belief we collectively have from the industry in general, and we are only getting started. For now, it's official - it was a total knock out! 


PS Last but by no means least, the event was moderated by Christopher Hall, who was completely hilarious while rather brilliantly handling our gang of panelists and presenters who were talking about things that he had trouble pronouncing never mind understanding! He did a great job of entertaining the audience while simultaneously easing the tension on the various KNOCK OUT competitors, and his humour was thoroughly enjoyed by apparently one and all - including our very generous sponsors!