The third issue of Scientic American’s Worldview is now available at www.saworldview.com.
In this latest issue I continue my comparative assessment of the biotechnology innovation environment in different countries. I also include additional highlights:
- Which country is home to the most drug inventors?
- Which country has the greatest biotechnology patenting intensity?
- Which country has the greatest relative biotechnology R&D spend?
- Which country has the most global collaboration on innovation?
- Which region has the fastest growing drug market?
- Which country has the largest drug market?
- Which country has the longest drug approval lag
- Which country has the most publications in the field of biotechnology?
- Which country is the largest drug exporter?
- Which country has the strongest public biotechnology markets?
I have also increased the number of countries measured from 38 last year to 48 this year.
The answers to these questions may suprise you. For answers to these questions and more, see the Scientific American Worldview project at www.saworldview.com
I will be presenting in an upcoming webinar:
Partnering and Investing in International Life Sciences
|Today, successful life sciences companies are feverishly evaluating international partnerships in search of places that are rapidly expanding. Some make the costly mistake of only using market size as the deciding factor, which is often misleading. Success in the global marketplace is driven by many factors. Overlooking these additional factors may be detrimental to your international goals.|
During this webinar, you will:
- Hear why a deep understanding of your potential partner’s innovation record is essential
- Learn how to measure the true size and growth rate of a specific market
- Understand why focus must center on individual countries rather than region
- Discover how to identify and mitigate commercial risk abroad
- Learn how to create a checklist for partnering and investing internationally
- See how one company has used technology to securely and efficiently accomplish their international licensing goals
Go here to learn more about this complimentary webinar sponsored by MERRILL DATASITE®.
Date & Time
June 7, 2011
1:00PM EDT / 10:00AM PDT
Add to Outlook Calendar
Yali Friedman, PhD Founder
Yali Friedman, Ph.D., is Founder of thinkBiotech. His book, Building Biotechnology, is used as a course text in dozens of biotechnology programs. His other books include Best Practices in Biotechnology Education and Best Practices in Biotechnology Business Development. Dr. Friedman also has strong exposure to leading issues in international biotechnology. Dr. Friedman teaches biotechnology management at the NIH and regularly guest-lectures for other biotechnology education programs, and writes and speaks on diverse topics such as biotechnology entrepreneurship, strategies to cope with a lack of management talent and capital when developing companies outside of established hubs, and new paradigms in technology-based economic development.
Jim Weissman Vice President of Business Development
As Vice President of Business Development for MannKind, Jim Weissman leads MannKind’s strategic alliance and licensing partnership efforts. He brings over 20 years of experience in general management, business development, and marketing in biotech and pharmaceuticals having worked in senior management positions at Pharmacia and Pfizer. Weissman served as the General Manager for Pharmacia Biotech UK & Ireland where he headed country operations including sales, marketing, customer support, and operations. He also served as the Director of Business Development for Pfizer Japan where he headed the New Product Planning, Licensing, and Corporate Strategic Planning Departments. Weissman received his B.S. in Chemistry from Bates College and has extensive international experience having lived and worked in Europe for 5 years and Japan for 11 years prior to returning to the USA in 2006.
David Yeary Moderator
David Yeary is the Vice President of Sales-Life Sciences for Merrill’s DataSite. Most recently, Mr. Yeary worked at Morgan Lewis as Director, Business and Practice Development where he assisted and lead business development opportunities in Life Sciences, Technology, Clean Tech and Digital Media and Entertainment. He also worked with private equity, venture capital and investment banks to bridge between client and investor. Mr. Yeary gained his experience at Synarc, Celera, IMS, Agouron/Pfizer and Roche/Syntex in various business development, sales and marketing roles. He has and continues to work with numerous startups as an advisor for business development, commercialization and marketing and communication functions. Periodically he can be heard on the radio or speaking at Stanford discussing the challenges and opportunities for the new entrepreneur. He holds a BS and MBA in business from California State University, Fresno.
I will be giving a talk on “Using patent information to track globalization” at the ACS conference in Anaheim next week. The talk is part of the ACS Division of Chemistry and Law session on What Can Patent Information Do For Scientists, and is based on analysis of data from DrugPatentWatch. I look forward to meeting BiotechBlog readers who may be in attendance. For those who cannot make the event, my talk will be based on my work on globalization of pharmaceutical innovation.
I’ve just had a paper published in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, using data from DrugPatentWatch to profile the locations of drug invention for the past decade.
The location of drug development is important for two reasons. Firstly, it is important to track the global spread of innovation. Much late stage drug development (e.g. clinical trials) and manufacturing have moved to lower wage-cost countries, but trends in the location of invention has not been clearly described. Knowing where drug invention is occurring can help streamline drug development by identifying ideal locations for research facilities. Secondly it is important to know where invention is occurring, because that may affect which drugs are developed. Early-stage research funding and, by extension, the research itself, is likely to be focused on conditions affecting the countries in which these activities are occurring. For example, research in the United States might focus on conditions such as heart disease and stroke, whereas research in Japan might emphasize stomach cancer.
By examining the patents covering drugs developed over the last decade, I was able to ascertain the locations of the inventors. Focusing on inventors is important because it gives a clear indication of where the control of the invention was located. Patents are required to list the names and locations of the individual(s) who maintained intellectual domination of the invention. Failure to list all inventors, or listing too many inventors, can yield an invalid patent. Whereas one might consider assessing globalization of invention by focusing on the location of the company funding the research, or the company listed on the patent, these strategies are flawed. The company funding the research may not be the same company which conducted the research (e.g. Japanese companies funded many of the early US biotechnology companies, but the inventions occurred in the US by US researchers, so focusing on the funder might produce the incorrect conclusion that the innovation was Japan-based), and many companies have facilities in multiple countries, making it impossible to determine in which of the countries an invention might have occurred. Looking at the company listed on a patent is also flawed. The company listed on a patent might not have been the company that housed the researchers or, even worse, it may be a tax shelter based in a country where no invention occurred. So, by focusing on the locations of the listed inventors it is possible to determine where the invention occurred. An additional benefit of this strategy is that it enables inclusion of patenters from numerous countries. For example for a patent listing one US-based and two Canadian inventors, the US would be given 1/3 credit for an invention, and Canada 2/3 credit.
So, what did I find? In short, the US and the legacy pharmaceutical countries in Europe (United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden, France and Switzerland) have been responsible for the bulk of new drugs invented over the past decade, and there is no indication that this dominance is waning. Emerging economies such as India and China were largely absent. For more details, please see the paper at Nature Reviews Drug Discovery: Location of pharmaceutical innovation: 2000–2009.
You can also get more detailed information on the complete set of drug inventors and where they live in my Global Drug Patent Inventor Report and Individual Country Drug Patent Inventor Reports.
What do you think of the findings? Are you surprised? Do you disagree? Sound off in the comments.
A new report from DrugPatentWatch.com profiles the leading researchers, US states, and countries responsible for drugs approved over the past ten years.
The report features:
- Top Inventors
- Which inventors were granted the most patents?
- Patents per Inventor
- The patents awarded to each inventor
- Approved Drugs per Inventor
- The approved drugs protected by each inventor’s patents
- Co-Inventors per Inventor
- The co-inventors listed on each inventor’s patents
- Assignees per Inventor
- The assignees listed on each inventor’s patents
- Inventors per US State
- A count of the number of inventors in each state, along with the number of patents awarded to each inventor
- Inventors per Country
- A count of the number of inventors in each country, along with the number of patents awarded to each inventor
Here is a short list of the top drug inventors:
|Inventor||US State / Country||Number of Patents|
|Wong, Patrick S.||California||24|
|Ebert, Charles D.||Utah||17|
|Chaudry, Imtiaz A.||New Jersey||17|
|Ayer, Atul D.||California||16|
|Mandeville, III, W. Harry||Massachusetts||16|
|Sequeira, Joel A.||New York||15|
|Rand, Paul K.||United Kingdom||15|
For more information, see http://www.DrugPatentWatch.com/reports/ .
Once again, the Scientific American WorldView project continues to measure global biotechnology innovation.
I had the pleasure of serving as lead editorial consultant of this project, and my mission was to cut through the marketing messages and develop a coherent measure of biotechnology innovation on a country-by-country basis.
Moira Gunn’s Tech Nation interview of Jeremy Abbate and I on the Scientific American worldView project is now available at IT Conversations. For more details, you can also see our video interview and the worldView website.