SCI Consortium addressing drug manufacturers as a consortium

Nschurch · 09-13-2002, 08:26 PM

Is there any benefit to approaching Merk,Lilly, Glaxco et al. as a group? The consortium of SCI. research centers, researchers, meeting together to identify one (or several) leading therapies, then inviting (competing) drug companies to conference in an effort to convince them of jointly financing a therapy of greatest potential.
The companies would be able to limit the cost of their individual investment, but would equally acquire any realized benefit, patent being shared.
Could a consensus be reached in identifying salient research therapies? Could competing drug companies be convinced of a profit to be gained by jointly advancing an SCI. drug?

Gilbert P. Church Jr.

Wise Young · 09-14-2002, 08:31 AM

Nschurch, it will not be easy. Most drug companies do not trust each other and would have a hard time joining a consortium where their data can be accessed by others. It is a little easier in spinal cord injury research because most companies don't think that it is such a big market and therefore look upon spinal cord injury research as a stepping stone to larger markets such as stroke, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, aging, etc. No major pharma company currently has a large scientific program in spinal cord injury at the present.

What we are trying to do at Rutgers is to provide a database that is so unique and so valuable that drug companies must have access to it or else they will not be able to compete effectively to develop therapies for spinal cord injury. The decision then becomes what they will get for what they will give up to be part of the consortium. The first step is to make sure that the database does provide contents of such value that no company or laboratory could afford to be left out.

Unfortunately, there is a chicken vs. egg problem here. Without industry or federal funding, it is very difficult to establish such a database. On the other hand, without the database, it is very difficult to attract the necessary funding. This problem is not so unusual. It is something that every new venture or collaboration faces. In the beginning moral persuasion is the only tool.

Wise.

09-13-2002, 08:26 PM	#1
Nschurch Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Shelburne, Vermont, USA. Posts: 2	SCI Consortium addressing drug manufacturers as a consortium Is there any benefit to approaching Merk,Lilly, Glaxco et al. as a group? The consortium of SCI. research centers, researchers, meeting together to identify one (or several) leading therapies, then inviting (competing) drug companies to conference in an effort to convince them of jointly financing a therapy of greatest potential. The companies would be able to limit the cost of their individual investment, but would equally acquire any realized benefit, patent being shared. Could a consensus be reached in identifying salient research therapies? Could competing drug companies be convinced of a profit to be gained by jointly advancing an SCI. drug? Gilbert P. Church Jr.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-14-2002, 08:31 AM	#2
Wise Young Administrator Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: New Brunswick, NJ, USA Posts: 37,975	Nschurch, it will not be easy. Most drug companies do not trust each other and would have a hard time joining a consortium where their data can be accessed by others. It is a little easier in spinal cord injury research because most companies don't think that it is such a big market and therefore look upon spinal cord injury research as a stepping stone to larger markets such as stroke, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, aging, etc. No major pharma company currently has a large scientific program in spinal cord injury at the present. What we are trying to do at Rutgers is to provide a database that is so unique and so valuable that drug companies must have access to it or else they will not be able to compete effectively to develop therapies for spinal cord injury. The decision then becomes what they will get for what they will give up to be part of the consortium. The first step is to make sure that the database does provide contents of such value that no company or laboratory could afford to be left out. Unfortunately, there is a chicken vs. egg problem here. Without industry or federal funding, it is very difficult to establish such a database. On the other hand, without the database, it is very difficult to attract the necessary funding. This problem is not so unusual. It is something that every new venture or collaboration faces. In the beginning moral persuasion is the only tool. Wise.