Elizabeth Holmes verdict: researchers share lessons for science

Emily Waltz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00006-9

IF: 64.8

2022-01-04

Nature

Abstract:Theranos case highlights the importance of peer review for biotech entrepreneurs, scientists say.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Lessons from Theranos - Restructuring Biomedical Innovation

Rishub Karan Das,Brian Christopher Drolet

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-022-01813-3

2022-04-04

Abstract:After raising more than $700 million, Elizabeth Holmes, the founder and chief executive officer of a healthcare startup once valued at $10 billion, was found guilty on four charges of defrauding investors. Founded in 2003, Theranos Inc. was a privately held corporation that aimed to disrupt the diagnostics industry with rapid, direct-to-consumer laboratory testing using only "a drop of blood" and the company's patented Nanotainer technology. By exploiting gaps in regulatory policy, Theranos brought its panel of laboratory tests to patients without pre-market review or validation from peer-reviewed scientific research. Investigations into Theranos' dubious operations and inaccurate test results exposed the failed venture which had squandered millions of dollars. Theranos affected the lives and health of patients further disrupting an already tenuous relationship between healthcare and the public - the importance of which cannot be understated in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. As medical systems address a national public health crisis and pervasive structural inequities, we must align stakeholder incentives between industry and academic biomedical innovation to rebuild trust with our patients.
Finding the truth in science

Elisabeth M. Bik

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-024-00702-w

IF: 78.5

2024-05-17

Nature Reviews Cancer

Abstract:In a 'publish or perish' culture, some scientists may resort to questionable research practices or even fraud. Scientific paper mills and artificial intelligence increasingly threaten the pursuit of truth in science. Structural changes, including heightened scrutiny of papers and authorship and better funding, are needed to ensure scientific integrity.

oncology
Protection of health research participants in the United States: a review of two cases

Alison Douglass,Peter Crampton

Abstract:Two research-related deaths and controversies in the United States during recent years have raised public concern over the safety of research participants. This paper explores the reasons why, in two studies, there was a failure of ethical oversight. The issues exposed by these failures have international relevance as they could possibly occur anywhere where human health research is carried out. Five factors that contributed to these failures are highlighted: 1. failure to support and resource research ethics committees; 2. failure of the research oversight process to adequately assess the risks and benefits of research, while giving undue emphasis to informed consent; 3. conflicts of interest arising from financial relationships and research ethics committee membership; 4. lack of consistent oversight of privately funded research; and 5. incompetent or intentional failure to adhere by ethical guidelines. There is considerable headway to be made in the United States, as in other countries, in the fostering and maintenance of robust systems of human research oversight.
The public-private research ecosystem in the genome editing era

Rami M Major,Arlene M Davis,Gail E Henderson,Greg Inamine,John M Conley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.109896

IF: 5.8

2024-05-03

iScience

Abstract:Biomedical research in the US has long been conducted in a public-private (PP) "ecosystem." Today, especially with gene therapies and genome editing-based medicine, publicly funded researchers frequently hand off their research to the private sector for clinical development, often to small, venture capital-funded startups in which they have a financial interest. This trend raises ethical questions about conflicts of interest, effectiveness of regulatory oversight, and justice in therapy access, that we are addressing in a multi-year, multidisciplinary study of the evolving governance of genome editing. This paper draws on interviews with scientists working across the PP divide and their private sector business and financial partners. We find little concern about potential ethical dilemmas, with two exceptions expressed by public sector scientists: concerns about inequitable access to treatments due to disparities in wealth, ethnicity, and health insurance benefits; and about whether their private collaborators' profit motive may affect their research objectives.
The winding journey of biotech capital raising: deciphering the jargon

Nicholas Frame,Michael Casasanta,Oded Ben-Joseph

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2023.06.011

Abstract:Ensuring biotech companies are sufficiently capitalized to propel innovation and development remains a central focus for management. In this article, we draw on our broad perspective interacting with venture capitalists to offer thoughts on investor feedback. Understanding venture capitalists' mindsets and investment theses will increase the probability of securing needed capital.
Share Structure and Entrepreneurship in UK Biotechnology Companies: An Empirical Study

Olivier Maynard,William Bains

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2008.11421520

2008-04-01

Journal of Corporate Law Studies

Abstract:Biotechnology start-up companies are dependent on investment to discover and develop their products, and often get that investment from venture capital groups (VCs). VCs almost always invest in liquidation preference shares, which provides them with upside enhancement and downside protection, and they impose detailed management controls on the company through shareholder veto provisions. This has been suggested as laying the company open to “investor opportunism”, actions which drive the company to actions or strategies which, while enhancing the investor's short-term shareholding value, damages the company as a whole and restricts its long-term prospects in the US. This paper reports on an analysis of the effect of the combination of complex share structures with multiple levels of liquidation preference (the norm in UK biotechnology companies) and of comprehensive investor control over the company's management. We find the same problems occurring in UK biotechnology companies as Fried and Ganor found in the US, with examples of companies being prevented from achieving exits, raising investment rounds and being driven to mergers which add no value to the enterprise. This both reduces the value of investee companies (an issue that VCs should address) and reduces the willingness of entrepreneurs and business angels to create new companies for VCs to invest in. This is made worse by the chronic underinvestment in UK high-tech start-ups. Examination of a number of potential solutions finds few of them are workable, but that requiring companies to disclose contracts that effectively transfer the power of directors to non-director shareholders could have some benefit.

law
The Acid Test for Biological Science: STAP Cells, Trust, and Replication

Cheryl Lancaster

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9628-2

IF: 3.777

2015-02-04

Science and Engineering Ethics

Abstract:In January 2014, a letter and original research article were published in Nature describing a process whereby somatic mouse cells could be converted into stem cells by subjecting them to stress. These “stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency” (STAP) cells were shown to be capable of contributing to all cell types of a developing embryo, and extra-embryonic tissues. The lead author of the publications, Haruko Obokata, became an overnight celebrity in Japan, where she was dubbed the new face of Japanese science. However, in the weeks that followed publication of the research, issues arose. Other laboratories and researchers (including authors on the original papers) found that they were unable to replicate Obokata et al.’s work. Closer scrutiny of the papers by the scientific community also suggested that there was manipulation of images that had been published, and Obokata was accused of misconduct. Those who should have been supervising her work (also her co-authors on the publications) were also heavily criticised. The STAP cell saga of 2014 is used as an example to highlight the importance of trust and replication in twenty-first century biological science. The role of trust in the scientific community is highlighted, and the effects on interactions between science and the public examined. Similarly, this essay aims to highlight the importance of replication, and how this is understood by researchers, the media, and the public. The expected behaviour of scientists in the twenty-first century is now more closely scrutinised.

ethics,history & philosophy of science,multidisciplinary sciences,engineering, multidisciplinary
Protecting rights to early-stage technology

Michael J Shuster,Henry Su,Sasha Blaug

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0603-701

IF: 46.9

2003-06-01

Nature Biotechnology

Abstract:Does the recent court decision invalidating the University of Rochester's 'method of treatment' patent herald a shift in policy indicating that such patents require successful testing of lead compounds?

biotechnology & applied microbiology
A Paradox of the Field's Own Success: Unintended Challenges in Bringing Cutting-Edge Science from the Bench to the Market

Nathan Yingling,Miguel Sena-Esteves,Heather L. Gray-Edwards

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/hum.2023.29264.nyi

2024-02-22

Human Gene Therapy

Abstract:Human Gene Therapy, Volume 35, Issue 3-4, Page 83-88, February 2024.

genetics & heredity,medicine, research & experimental,biotechnology & applied microbiology
Synthetic biology startups face a 'reckoning'

Robert F. Service

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ads7684

IF: 56.9

2024-09-01

Science

Abstract:Three big firms falter, but startups find niches in pharma and other small-volume markets

multidisciplinary sciences
Physician entrepreneur: lessons learned in raising capital for biomedical innovation

Farzad Soleimani,Darius G Kharabi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0b013e32833732fa

Abstract:Purpose of review: The funding landscape for medical devices is becoming increasingly difficult and complex. The purpose of this article is to provide the physician entrepreneur with a review of the main sources of capital available to fund the development and commercialization of biomedical innovations, and to highlight some of the important nuances of these funding sources that the physician entrepreneur should consider. Recent findings: The article examines the benefits and drawbacks of funding from venture capital firms, grants, friends and family, angel investors, incubators and industry partners from the perspective of the physician entrepreneur, and provides some key points to consider when selecting and working with an investor. The article's recommendations include: in selecting an investor, seek those whose investment thesis, areas of expertise and desired company stage (early vs. late) match the technology and the objectives of the company. In negotiating with an investor, an effective way to increase the company's valuation is to bring multiple bidders to the table. In working with an investor, respect junior staff members as much as senior partners and be wary of conflicts of interest with venture capital entrepreneurs-in-residence. Summary: There are both advantages and disadvantages to each of the funding sources examined here, and the choice of a funding partner depends significantly on the stage of development (in both corporate and technology) of the physician entrepreneur's venture and the role that the physician entrepreneur desires to play in it.
The Unholy Grail of cancer screening: or is it just about the Benjamins?

Miyo K. Chatanaka,George M. Yousef,Eleftherios P. Diamandis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2024-1013

2024-09-22

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Abstract:The biotechnology company Grail developed a non-invasive blood test (Galleri test) which is claimed to detect 50 types of cancer at early and potentially curable stages. The initially promising results from prospective studies, and the anticipated financial success of Grail led the sequencing giant Illumina to purchase Grail for $8 billion (2021). Following this event, Grail collaborated with the UK National Health System to further clarify the test's capability, in a 3-year prospective trial, along with the standard of care. At the end of the first year, UK-NHS announced that they will stop the trial due to unsatisfactory clinical performance and until they analyze the data for the first year (which already enrolled 140,000 participants). Legal and financial issues between the interested parties are currently in flux. The Grail case is reminiscent of the multi-billion Theranos scandal, which sent a few people to jail and led to company dissolution. We previously expressed concerns about the sensitivity and specificity of the Galleri test. In this Perspective, we revisit the hyped technology, and we provide new suggestions on the use of this test.

medical laboratory technology
Dana-Farber retractions: meet the blogger who spotted problems in dozens of cancer papers

Max Kozlov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00202-9

IF: 64.8

2024-01-26

Nature

Abstract:Nature talks to Sholto David about his process for flagging image manipulation and his tips for scientists under scrutiny. Nature talks to Sholto David about his process for flagging image manipulation and his tips for scientists under scrutiny.

multidisciplinary sciences
Canaries in the mines: children, risk, non-therapeutic research, and justice

M Spriggs

Abstract:The Kennedy Krieger lead paint study received a lot of attention after a US Court of Appeals ruled that a parent cannot consent to the participation of a child in non-therapeutic research. The ruling has raised fears that, if it goes unchallenged, valuable research might not proceed and ultimately all children would be harmed. The author discusses significant aspects of the study that have been neglected, and argues that the study was unethical because it involved injustice and its design meant that the study lacked importance and value. Issues of benefit, risk, and consent are vital, but it is sometimes a mistake to consider these issues before settling questions about justice and the importance and value of a research project. The author concludes by offering a strategy for researchers and reviewers of research to appreciate, in a vivid way, the implications of research participation.
Research Misconduct, Retraction, and Cleansing the Medical Literature: Lessons from the Poehlman Case

Harold C. Sox,Drummond Rennie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-144-8-200604180-00123

IF: 39.2

2006-04-18

Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract:The scientific literature is a record of the search for truth. Publication of faked data diverts this search. The scientific community has a duty to warn people to ignore an article containing faked data and must try to prevent inadvertent citation of it. The scientific community accomplishes these tasks by publishing a retraction and linking it to the fraudulent article's citation in electronic indexes of the medical literature, such as PubMed. This mechanism is far from perfect, as shown by a case history of scientific fraud perpetrated by Eric Poehlman, PhD. His institution notified 3 journals that they had published tainted articles. Two journals failed to retract. The third journal retracted immediately, but other authors continued to cite the retracted article. Another duty of the scientific community is to verify the integrity of other articles published by the author of a fraudulent article. This task falls to the author's institution and requires coauthors to vouch for their article's integrity by convincing institutional investigators that the suspect author could not have altered the raw scientific data from their study. Two universities are currently investigating Poehlman's published research. Maintaining the integrity of the scientific literature requires governmental institutions that have the authority to investigate and punish guilty scientists and requires that research institutions investigate alleged fraud. It requires journal editors to issue a retraction when they learn that their journal has published a tainted article. It requires research institutions to accept their responsibility to investigate every article published by a scientist who has published even 1 fraudulent article. Finally, it requires authors to take pains to avoid citing retracted articles and to issue a correction when they inadvertently cite a retracted article.

medicine, general & internal
CRISPR cures and cancer vaccines: researchers can help to shepherd them to market

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01714-0

IF: 64.8

2024-06-12

Nature

Abstract:It's not just people with ultra-rare disorders who could benefit from hyper-personalized therapies. Scientists and regulators must work together to ensure the benefits are spread. It's not just people with ultra-rare disorders who could benefit from hyper-personalized therapies. Scientists and regulators must work together to ensure the benefits are spread.

multidisciplinary sciences
Financing repurposed drugs for rare diseases: a case study of Unravel Biosciences

Bechara Abouarab,Christian Bazarian,Zied Ben Chaouch,Andrew W Lo,Guillermo Mourenza Gonzalez,Richard Novak,Frederic Vigneault

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-023-02753-y

2023-09-12

Abstract:Background: We consider two key challenges that early-stage biotechnology firms face in developing a sustainable financing strategy and a sustainable business model: developing a valuation model for drug compounds, and choosing an appropriate operating model and corporate structure. We use the specific example of Unravel Biosciences-a therapeutics platform company that identifies novel drug targets through off-target mechanisms of existing drugs and then develops optimized new molecules-throughout the paper and explore a specific scenario of drug repurposing for rare genetic diseases. Results: The first challenge consists of producing a realistic financial valuation of a potential rare disease repurposed drug compound, in this case targeting Rett syndrome. More generally, we develop a framework to value a portfolio of pairwise correlated rare disease compounds in early-stage development and quantify its risk profile. We estimate the probability of a negative return to be [Formula: see text] for a single compound and [Formula: see text] for a portfolio of 8 drugs. The probability of selling the project at a loss decreases from [Formula: see text] (phase 3) for a single compound to [Formula: see text] (phase 3) for the 8-drug portfolio. For the second challenge, we find that the choice of operating model and corporate structure is crucial for early-stage biotech startups and illustrate this point with three concrete examples. Conclusions: Repurposing existing compounds offers important advantages that could help early-stage biotech startups better align their business and financing issues with their scientific and medical objectives, enter a space that is not occupied by large pharmaceutical companies, and accelerate the validation of their drug development platform.
Poor quality animal studies cause clinical trials to follow false leads.

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5453

2015-01-01

Abstract:A lack of rigour in animal studies is damaging the quality of research and can send clinical trials up blind alleys, wasting time and money, an international study has found.1The findings were echoed in a second, unconnected study from McGill University in Montreal, Canada, which showed that animal trials of the kidney cancer drug sunitinib (Sutent) overestimated its effect by 45%.2Both teams concluded that improvements are needed in how preclinical studies in animals are planned, organised, and published. Malcolm Macleod, of the University of Edinburgh, UK, who was lead author of the first study, told a briefing at the Science Media Centre in London that these methods were no secret, as they are already used in clinical trials in humans: randomisation, blinding, sample size calculations, and declarations of interest, for example.Macleod and colleagues1 used three …
Social Non-profit Bioentrepreneurship: Current Status and Future Impact on Global Health

Amir H. Sadeghi,Charlotte Koldeweij,Grissel Trujillo-de Santiago,Milad Tannazi,Nikkie Hosseinnia,Oscar van Loosbroek,Amir Manbachi,Yannick J. H. J. Taverne,Ad J. J. C. Bogers,Mario Moisés Alvarez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.541191

IF: 5.2

2021-10-01

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:For-profit biotechnological and pharmaceutical companies have played an essential role in the research and development (R&D) of innovative medical products and drugs for many decades and embody a trillion-dollar industry. The past decades have been marked by an increase in growth of social non-profit biotechnology companies and organizations led by entrepreneurs committed to solve (global) health issues. In this review, we define the concept of social bioentrepreneurship and consider the potential impact of such ventures on global health. We analyse the current status of non-profit biotechnology and clarify the strategy, motivation, funding, and marketing techniques of these enterprises. We find that these non-profit ventures mainly focus on neglected and rare diseases by using different but also similar funding, marketing, and business strategy approaches to for-profit biotechnology enterprises. We also identify good leadership, multidisciplinary teams, and public awareness as key components to achieve long-term survival and higher success rates. Challenges faced by bioentrepreneurs include the lack of a clearly defined regulatory environment or governmental incentives to support their endeavors. Overall, with this qualitative data review and market analysis we draw a promising picture of social non-profit bioentrepreneurship and underscore its current and future impact on global health issues.

public, environmental & occupational health
Lost in translation: the valley of death across preclinical and clinical divide – identification of problems and overcoming obstacles

Attila A. Seyhan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41231-019-0050-7

2019-11-18

Translational Medicine Communications

Abstract:Abstract A rift that has opened up between basic research (bench) and clinical research and patients (bed) who need their new treatments, diagnostics and prevention, and this rift is widening and getting deeper. The crisis involving the “translation” of basic scientific findings in a laboratory setting into human applications and potential treatments or biomarkers for a disease is widely recognized both in academia and industry. Despite the attempts that have been made both in academic and industry settings to mitigate this problem, the high attrition rates of drug development and the problem with reproducibility and translatability of preclinical findings to human applications remain a fact and the return on the investment has been limited in terms of clinical impact. Here I provide an overview of the challenges facing the drug development, and translational discordance with specific focus on a number of “culprits” in translational research including poor hypothesis, irreproducible data, ambiguous preclinical models, statistical errors, the influence of organizational structures, lack of incentives in the academic setting, governmental funding mechanisms, the clinical relevance of basic research, insufficient transparency, and lack of data sharing in research. I further provide some suggestions and new strategies that include some new aspects on open innovation models, entrepreneurship, transparency, and decision making to overcome each of the many problems during the drug discovery and development process and to more dynamically adjust for innovation challenges with broader scientific feedback.

Elizabeth Holmes verdict: researchers share lessons for science

Lessons from Theranos - Restructuring Biomedical Innovation

Finding the truth in science

Protection of health research participants in the United States: a review of two cases

The public-private research ecosystem in the genome editing era

The winding journey of biotech capital raising: deciphering the jargon

Share Structure and Entrepreneurship in UK Biotechnology Companies: An Empirical Study

The Acid Test for Biological Science: STAP Cells, Trust, and Replication

Protecting rights to early-stage technology

A Paradox of the Field's Own Success: Unintended Challenges in Bringing Cutting-Edge Science from the Bench to the Market

Synthetic biology startups face a 'reckoning'

Physician entrepreneur: lessons learned in raising capital for biomedical innovation

The Unholy Grail of cancer screening: or is it just about the Benjamins?

Dana-Farber retractions: meet the blogger who spotted problems in dozens of cancer papers

Canaries in the mines: children, risk, non-therapeutic research, and justice

Research Misconduct, Retraction, and Cleansing the Medical Literature: Lessons from the Poehlman Case

CRISPR cures and cancer vaccines: researchers can help to shepherd them to market

Financing repurposed drugs for rare diseases: a case study of Unravel Biosciences

Poor quality animal studies cause clinical trials to follow false leads.

Social Non-profit Bioentrepreneurship: Current Status and Future Impact on Global Health

Lost in translation: the valley of death across preclinical and clinical divide – identification of problems and overcoming obstacles