 WELCOME ! |
Eurasanté, IDIS and EBD collaborate to launch a new international pharma-tech transfer event ‘Biofit’.
Biofit is positioned to become a leading event focused on biotechnology innovation.
“Europe’s Universities and Institutes are a tremendous source of innovation. With pharma showing a strong interest in early stage projects, Biofit has the potential to grow into a major technology exchange,” said Philip Ledger, Corporate VP of EBD Group.
 See the press release»» |
| Sponsors |
|
| News
 |
Ashley J. Stevens, President of the AUTM (USA) |
“AUTM members manage and license innovations resulting from academic and non-profit research. We make these innovations available to the public through commercial development, and we are strongly committed to the advancement of science and to ensuring that public funded innovations benefit the public. (…)
The data in the reports I listed demonstrate the success our universities have had in partnering with corporations to get innovations to market. Remember, neither universities nor scientists commercialize their research—companies do. Whether this is through established companies or startup companies specially formed to develop a new technology, protection from infringement is vital to justifying the investment risk involved in developing new technologies. Without this protection companies can’t – and won’t – take that risk.”
Excerpts from Ashley Stevens’ remarks addressed during his speech to SACGHS (Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health, and Society) on February 5, 2010".
In 2010, Dr. Stevens became Special Assistant to the VP of Research at Boston University, where he has been tasked with exploring the faculty’s interest in launching a university-wide academic program focused on the role of intellectual property and the evolution of models for the translation of ideas and knowledge into economic development. Previously, he spent 15 years as Director and then Executive Director, Technology Transfer in the Office of Technology Development at Boston University.
He is also Senior Research Associate in the Institute for Technology Entrepreneurship and Commercialization in Boston University’s School of Management, where he teaches two graduate-level, inter-disciplinary courses on Technology Commercialization. Before joining Boston University, he was Director of the Office of Technology Transfer at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, a teaching affiliate of the Harvard Medical School.
Since he joined Boston University, the Office of Technology Development has spun out over 50 companies based on the University’s research, a number of which have raised substantial amounts of capital, and the University’s licensing income climbed steadily.
Prior to entering the technology transfer profession, Dr. Stevens worked in the biotechnology industry for nearly ten years. He was a co-founder of Kytogenics, Inc., of which he is still a Director, was co-founder and General Manager of Genmap, Inc., and was Vice President of Business Development for BioTechnica International. He started his career with The Procter & Gamble Company, where he held a number of positions in sales, marketing, strategic planning and acquisitions.
Dr. Stevens publishes and lectures frequently on many aspects of technology transfer, including the Bayh-Dole Act, the economic impact of technology transfer and its role in economic development, the contribution of academia to the discovery of new drugs and vaccines, the role of technology transfer in global health and technology valuation. He was the recipient of the Bayh-Dole Award at Association of University Technology Managers 2007 Annual Meeting and became President of AUTM in March 2010. He is also active in the Licensing Executives Society and the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council.
Dr. Stevens holds a Bachelor of Arts in Natural Sciences, a Master of Arts and a Doctor of Philosophy in Physical Chemistry from Oxford University. He is a Certified Licensing Professional.
 
 |
"I am very pleased to welcome Mr G. Steven Burrill, Chief Executive Officer of Burrill & Company as keynote speaker for the plenary session of Biofit that will focus on Open Innovation issues" confirmed Etienne Vervaecke, Biofit’s General commissioner. |
“We lived in a world where we had largely a one size fits all drug. […] That’s no longer true. […]We’ve moved very rapidly into the world of more personalized medicine.
If you have got limited capital, you figure out what are the few things that you can do that have a higher probability of success, and you put a lot of other things in the refrigerator.
In the worst year of the capital market’s history, we raised more money than we ever did before. It makes no sense. But if you say why is that? That’s because we had to. And when death is the alternative, we get pretty inventive. The instinct to survive is incredibly powerful. […] Secondly, we raised a lot of money because big pharma is looking for a pipeline. […] No matter how inventive they are, they can’t invent enough to support themselves. So increasingly they’re doing partnerships, they’re doing acquisitions, they’re doing all kinds of things to shore up their pipeline. […]We’ll raise a lot of money in 2010 for the same reasons.”
Excerpts from Steven Burrill’s interview accorded to Biobusiness TV at the occasion of the launch of his annual state of the biotechnology industry report entitled "Biotech 2010 Life Sciences: Adapting for Success".
G. Steven Burrill has been involved in the growth and prosperity of the biotechnology industry for over 40 years. Mr. Burrill is one of the original architects of the industry and one of its most avid and sustained developers. He serves as Chairman of the Boards of Pharmasset, BioImagene and Abunda Corporation, and is a member of the Boards of Directors of Catalyst Biosciences, DepoMed, Ikano Therapeutics, NewBridge, ProteoGenix, Proventys, Targacept and XDx. Before founding Burrill & Company in 1994, he spent 28 years with Ernst & Young, directing services to clients in the biotechnology/life sciences/high technology/manufacturing industries worldwide. In 2002, Mr. Burrill was recognized as the biotech investment visionary by the Scientific American magazine (The Scientific American 50).
Mr. Burrill is a founder and Chairman of the Board of the Foundation for the National Medals of Science and Technology. He serves as Chairman of the San Francisco Mayor’s Biotech Advisory Committee (MayBAC). He serves on the Boards of the Bay Area Science Infrastructure Consortium, BayBio (Emeritus), California Healthcare Institute (Emeritus), The Exploratorium (Emeritus), The Kellogg Center for Biotechnology, the MIT Center for Biomedical Innovation, and the National Health Museum (Vice Chairman). He also serves on the Purdue Discovery Park External Advisory Committee and on the editorial board of the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology and is on the advisory board of the Center for Policy on Emerging Technologies (C-PET). He is an advisor to the University of Illinois Institute for Genomic Biology, University of Wisconsin - College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Minnesota College of Biological Sciences, Duke University, and is an adjunct professor at University of California, San Francisco.
 |
Nicholas Dunster, PhD, Senior Business Analyst,
The Wellcome Trust, UK |
 |
How can universities and the private sector foster tech transfer and successful partnerships?
It is important that there is a clear understanding of the needs and wants of both parties. The institution must try to form a realistic assessment of the value of the technology and the downstream partner should be clear about the profile/stage of development of opportunity that is sought. There is more chance of success if both parties are flexible in their approach to structuring the deal - either as a straight license, risk-sharing collaboration or the creation of a spin out. Further, there should be clarity over IP rights, and not just arising IP but all background IP necessary to develop the project. What rights do the funders of the backgroud IP have over the nature of the exploitation route? Finally, both parties should be pragmatic in their assessment of progress, which will never be in a linear or even fashion.
What could be the impact of “open innovation” in academic technology transfer practice?
There is an opportunity to think creatively about how the open innovation model could provide a mindset for early stage companies to best exploit their portfolio of assets. Open innovation requires the holder of the asset to be outward facing and to be alive to the different ways that their technology could dovetail with others. A curiosity of the technological and end-user environments is key to maximising the outcomes from such an approach. As an example, platform technologies, with their generic applicability, might be particularly suited to the creation of multiple alliances. These in turn, could provide increased proof of concept in order to validate the core asset across a number of settings. The clustering of new enterprises around an estabilished house of technological development is one way to facilitate the cross-fertilisation of ideas and the pooling of resource. In alignment with this idea, the Wellcome Trust has contributed funding to the Open Innovation Bioscience Park based in Stevenage, which is in close proximity to GSK.
 |
Garold Breit, Executive Director, Technology Transfer Office,
University of Manitoba, Canada |
 |
How can universities and the private sector foster tech transfer and successful partnerships?
I find that the best University/Industry alliances are built on a strong scientific foundation and on close personal relationships. Still, to harness the power of these collaborations, it is important to move toward the market quickly and efficiently. In fact, lowering transaction costs, for all parties, is important. We anticipate that Biofit will be a major component in our approach to building partnerships and reducing transaction costs.
What could be the impact of “open innovation” in academic technology transfer practice?
We are using “open innovation” principles in all of our partnering efforts. That is, we want to ensure that our technologies are utilized to the maximum, whether in the final product offering or in developing that final product. And, we want to be aware of field-of-use leverage, limited-time exclusive or co-exclusive approaches to technology management. In order to utilize “open” theories, we find that direct, face-to-face meetings (as Biofit allows), and creative deal-making strategies, with partners who have established “bona fides,” leads to “open gains” for all.
In your opinion, how Biofit could facilitate bridge-building between academic world and industry?
The BioFit Conference is uniquely positioned at the crossroads of Europe and in an easily accessible spot for North Americans. While BioFit provides that famous French hospitality in a user-friendly facility, it also promises to be a truly “international” Conference. I find that the Conference is tuned to meet the needs of deal makers.
|
Conferences
Mature companies