No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

With the aging population and increase in chronic disease conditions, innovation to transform treatment pathways and service delivery will be necessary. The innovation adoption process however, can take 15 years before widespread adoption occurs in most healthcare systems. Current UK government policies to increase the facilitation of innovation adoption are under way. The aim of this study is to explore perceptions of tri-sectoral collaborations in the healthcare sector. The data in the study are drawn from a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2015 of professionals in academia, industry and the healthcare sectors in England, focusing on Diabetes care. Academia and healthcare respondents had the least work experience outside of their sectors compared to the industry respondents. Healthcare and academia respondents rated the industry sector less trustworthy, unethical, having different goals and less understanding of the other sectors. Industry respondents had a more positive perspective towards potential collaborators. The results from the study demonstrate greater potential challenges to tri-sectoral collaborations and the government's knowledge translation policy, due to pre-conceived notions and lack of understanding of other sectors. The purely structural approach of establishing government mandated translational networks may be insufficient without active attempts to improve collaborative relationships. Mechanisms to facilitate trust building and collaboration are proposed.

Stock market volatility in the cell therapy industry has greatly hindered the investment necessary to fund translational therapies. Here, we review the volatility of leading companies and suggest that a distinct industry is maturing to a point at which the volatility should subside, providing a more attractive environment for future growth.

In the first quarter of 2012, publicly traded companies in the cell-based therapy industry continued to show promising overall growth. Highlights included $85 million in new capital investment and steady clinical trial progress.

The aim of this perspective piece is to highlight how the "social perception" and "financial reality" of regenerative medicine may act to hinder its evolution into the principal health-care option for the future. We also consider the role of the consumer and the need for increased public awareness. Furthermore, we consider the effects of the changing social attitudes toward the field, as well as taking into account the influence of current and future political thinking. From a financial viewpoint, we analyze the compatibility of the current venture capital model with regenerative medicine start-ups and explore approaches to ensure sufficient funding and support throughout all stages of product development, for example, the modularization of funding.

No abstract