© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structures Technology Transfer on the Ochota Research Campus Marcin Szumowski Acknowledgements Gabor Lamm, EMBLEM, GmbH Antonella Calvia – EBI / JASPERS, CoWI Team Andrzej Białkowski – Miler, IBD PAN

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structuresBackground Centre for Preclinical and Technological Research (CePT) 100 M Euro investment project : contract signed with Ministry of Science and Higher Education in September 2009 (approved by MRD) As a large-scale project CePT needs European Commission approval to assure funding – requires response to EC comments following review Major criticism regarding lack of Technology Transfer (TT) and commercialisation strategy – approval decision pending development of acceptable strategy for CePT TT platform CePT TT programme developed jointly with JASPERS and approved by EC

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structures Innovation in industry and research Poland among the worst countries in the EU in terms of Innovation Index (industry): 2006 summary analysis for IE OP Technology Transfer from R&D institutions to industry is very weak Very low level of research funding produces relatively high level and high quality of scientific output (next slide) Creativity driven research lacks the component of innovation cycle Identification of several significant barriers to effective TT in Poland

© EMBLEM 2009 Source: Presentation of Prof. Jerzy Duszyński Prague summit, March 25, 2009

© EMBLEM 2009 Circle of curiosity driven research Circle of innovation This circle can take months to decades but also relies on high quality research ! Tax Payer Results Products Science

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structuresMain barriers to effective TT in Poland Very low and too dispersed financing of research Non efficient use of European Funds to promote innovation through technology transfer and science – industry cooperation Frequently incorrect approach to Technology Transfer (TT) Political (short-term) rather than economical and sustainable (long- term) approach to increasing innovation and stimulating TT Low awareness in research community and lack of proper incentives Low level of cooperation between research institutions of similar profiles Legal and tax barriers and lack of proper incentives at the national level

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structuresBest practice examples Germany: European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBLEM) and Max Planck Society UK: Oxford, Cambridge and Imperial College Israel: Weizmann Institute France (ISERM), Denmark (CoWI), Finland, Sweeden, Norway … United States: MIT, Harvard, Standford, Berkley and other California Universities, Yale, John Hopkins University, University of Texas, NIH, etc. All work well – which one is the best benchmark?

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structuresCePT Consortium 2008 R&D budget

© EMBLEM 2009 Knowledge Creation & Transfer – EMBL Model DiscoveryProtectIdea Start Up Company EMBL*EMBLEM** ETF*** Licensing * European Molecular Biology Laboratory ( ** EMBLEM Technology Transfer GmbH ( *** EMBL Technology Fund ( 1,400 Staff Expenditure € 156 M (2008) 8 FTEs; >300 IPR >400 lic. agrm. 12 spin-outs VC Fund Fund Size € 26M from international VCs

© EMBLEM 2009 EMBLEM Technology Transfer Mission Commercialisation of basic research-derived IP for fair return Spread benefits of basic research derived IP to the EMBL Member States Contribute to improving Human Health Help secure EMBL research excellence and renown by - Accessing new technologies - Attracting scientific staff

© EMBLEM 2009 EMBLEM Facts and Figures (as of ) est. 1999, wholly owned Ltd. (GmbH) of EMBL a partner of - University of Heidelberg Clinics & Medical Faculty 8 FTEs Income 07/ /2009: 4.4 Mio. € more than 250 licensees including all the major players in the biotech/pharmaceutical/instrumentation market(s) over 400 active license contracts in place ca. 40 invention disclosures/annum ca. 250 MTAs, 100 CDAs and 30 IIAs per year Current IPR Portfolio: >250 granted patents and patent applications 71 © (software/database) 19 ® trademarks 12 spin-out companies

© EMBLEM 2009 NameFieldFounding YearVC Fin. Phase Lion BioscienceBioinformatics1997Post IPO Cenix BioscienceRNAi19992nd round CellzomeChem. Proteomics20004th round Anadys Inc.Anti Viral2000Post IPO Gene BridgesGenetic Eng EVP Inc.Neuronal Disorders20013rd round SLSSoftware HybricoreHT mAb Prod2002seed TriskelOncology2006seed Elara PharmaOncology20061st round BioBytesBioinformatics2008Seed Savira PharmaInfluenza2009Seed EMBL Spin-Out Companies Portfolio Overview

© EMBLEM 2009 EMBLEM Activities Proactively identify, develop and protect IP Commercialisation (license-, collaboration-,grant-, & consultancy- agreements) License Collaboration Grant Consultancy

© EMBLEM 2009 EMBLEM Activities cont. NDAs/CDAs, MTAs, IPR Issues IP portfolio management Market potential and value assessment Structuring of EMBL spin-outs (IP portfolio, management, infrastructure) Training and Education

© EMBLEM 2009 Biotechnology e.g. Enabling Technologies Therapeutics Diagnostics Software e.g. Bio- Informatics Databases LIMS Nanotechnology e.g. Chip- Technology Nanotubes Devices e.g. Microscopy Robotics EMBLEM Technology Focus

© EMBLEM 2009 Technology Focus Big Pharma is reliant on externally sourced products Source: MedTrack 2008  In-Licensed products are amongst top sellers & contribute significantly to revenue

© EMBLEM 2009 EMBLEM Licensees Geographic Distribution

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structuresEffective TT Platform set-up tasks Improved communication and interaction between public and private sector Procedures and incentive schemes to disseminate and effectively exploit research results to translate them into new products and services Proper management of intellectual property (i.e. The Commission Recommendation on the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and Code of Practice for universities and other public research organisations) Increased engagement in academia-industry collaborations

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structuresEffective TT Platform set-up tasks Licensing research results to industry Bridging the gap within the translational process („Proof-of- concept” phase funding) Development of an entrepreneurial culture Creating spin-offs Easy, right?

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structures Incubation policy POC fund TTO guidelines VC

© EMBLEM 2009 Status of the CePT TT structures Summary: Technology Transfer Success Factors Factors: 3S  Scale (achieving critical mass – R&D funding and „deal flow”)  Structure (effective organizational structure and business model suitable to the low “deal flow”)  Support (hiring the right people to execute and develop the business, holding them accountable for the results) Measures to achieve success:  EMS (Education, Motivation, Support) just do it