Opening Up to Precompetitive Collaboration

Altshuler, Jill S.; Balogh, Erin; Barker, Anna D.; Eck, Stephen L.; Friend, Stephen H.; Ginsburg, Geoffrey S.; Herbst, Roy S.; Nass, Sharyl J.; Streeter, Christopher M.; Wagner, John A.

doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3001515

Cited by 52 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A single pharmaceutical company rarely has adequate resources to effectively and expediently address the complex mechanisms by which cancer cells become resistant to treatment. Precompetitive collaboration, or collaboration among companies, to achieve goals that can be more effectively accomplished by a group effort and have the potential to benefit the oncology community as a whole has been proposed as a critical driver for reinvigorating the biomedical enterprise by creating and unlocking value (32,33). Realizing that major cancer discoveries are not typically best pursued in isolation, funding agencies such as Stand Up To Cancer are actively trying to Table 3.…”

Section: Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerating Cancer Therapy Development: The Importance of Combination Strategies and Collaboration. Summary of an Institute of Medicine Workshop

LoRusso

Canetta

Wagner

et al. 2012

Clinical Cancer Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer cells contain multiple genetic changes in cell signaling pathways that drive abnormal cell survival, proliferation, invasion, and metastasis. Unfortunately, patients treated with single agents inhibiting only one of these pathways-even if showing an initial response-often develop resistance with subsequent relapse or progression of their cancer, typically via the activation of an alternative uninhibited pathway. Combination therapies offer the potential for inhibiting multiple targets and pathways simultaneously to more effectively kill cancer cells and prevent or delay the emergence of drug resistance. However, there are many unique challenges to developing combination therapies, including devising and applying appropriate preclinical tests and clinical trial designs, prioritizing which combination therapies to test, avoiding overlapping toxicity of multiple agents, and overcoming legal, cultural, and regulatory barriers that impede collaboration among multiple companies, organizations, and/or institutions. More effective strategies to efficiently develop combination cancer therapies are urgently needed. Thus, the Institute of Medicine's National Cancer Policy Forum recently convened a workshop with the goal of identifying barriers that may be impeding the development of combination investigational cancer therapies, as well as potential solutions to overcome those barriers, improve collaboration, and ultimately accelerate the development of promising combinations of investigational cancer therapies.

show abstract

Section: Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerating Cancer Therapy Development: The Importance of Combination Strategies and Collaboration. Summary of an Institute of Medicine Workshop

LoRusso

Canetta

Wagner

et al. 2012

Clinical Cancer Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[17] Enfin, il est essentiel de considérer que la frontière entre compétitif et précompétitif est extrêmement variable, y compris au sein même du consortium, en fonction des partenaires et en fonction du temps. En effet, si le « lit d'innovation » est partagé, il faut rester conscient qu'à un certain moment le compétitif peut reprendre le pas sur le partage complètement ouvert des connaissances, pour des raisons simples de viabilité économique des entreprises et des institutions.…”

Section: Ce Que Ce N'est Pasunclassified

“…Althshuler a classé ces partenariats en 8 catégories en fonction des résultats qu'ils produisent, des apports et des possibilités d'exploitation. [17] D'une façon générale, il apparait que la mise en place de partenariats précompétitifs doivent impérativement tenir compte, très tôt dans la discussion, des deux notions suivantes :…”

Section: La Propriété Intellectuelleunclassified

Recherche précompétitive, une mise en synergie des ressources publiques et privées : pour quels objectifs, comment et dans quel cadre juridique ?

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Résumé -L'objectif de la Table Ronde était d'aborder la Recherche Pré-compétitive pour la première fois lors des Rencontres de Giens. Les participants venaient de l'industrie du médicament, des biotech, de l'industrie du dispositif, de l'académie, des services et sociétés de valorisation, des ministères, du monde de la recherche clinique et fondamentale. Ils ont fait le constat des changements profonds dans la connaissance des maladies et dans le développement des médicaments. À l'aide d'exemples dans le monde de la Santé et en dehors, ils ont identifié les principes, les enjeux, les facteurs de succès et de risque de la recherche précompétitive. Les particularités de la gestion de la propriété intellectuelle ont été plus particulièrement étudiées. La Table Ronde a conclu sur les principes de la recherche précompétitive en Santé, une révolution culturelle nécessaire. C'est développer une recherche en partenariat fondée sur des principes nouveaux : i) comprendre et partager ; ii) intégrer la complexité du vivant ; iii) agir dans l'interdisciplinarité.

show abstract

“…By temporarily putting aside their institutional dif erences, these collaborations aim to accelerate individual research ef orts by building broadly accessible standardized resources (1,2). T us, researchers who do not directly participate in a consortium's scientif c ef orts can still benef t from the partnership's output.…”

Section: " "mentioning

confidence: 99%

Consortium Sandbox: Building and Sharing Resources

Lim

2014

Sci. Transl. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some common challenges of biomedical product translation-scientif c, regulatory, adoption, and reimbursement-can best be addressed by the broad sharing of resources or tools. But, such aids remain undeveloped because the undertaking requires expertise from multiple research sectors as well as validation across organizations. Biomedical resource development can benef t from directed consortia-a partnership framework that provides neutral and temporary collaborative environments for several, oftentimes competing, organizations and leverages the aggregated intellect and resources of stakeholders so as to create versatile solutions. By analyzing 369 biomedical research consortia, we tracked consortia growth around the world and gained insight into how this partnership model advances biomedical research. Our analyses suggest that research-by-consortium provides benef t to biomedical science, but the model needs further optimization before it can be fully integrated into the biomedical research pipeline. from the European Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), a multination funding program that aims to stimulate and support networked research within this continent. Of the 183 total biomedical research consortia (61%) launched in the European Union between 2007 and 2013, 111 were supported with FP7 funding, which includes those associated with IMI. Using broad categoriesacademia, government, health care organizations, industry, nonprof t foundations, and third-party organizations (table S2)-we assessed the types of organizations responsible for initiating consortia and found that government agencies were responsible for initiating the majority of the 369 consortia cataloged, followed by third-party organizations and industry ( Fig. 2A). Data on trends by year (Fig. 2B) suggested that industry has increased initiation of its own consortia, with two-thirds of industry-initiated consortia launched between 2007 and 2013 supported by IMI.Of all biomedical research consortia launched in Europe, ~58% operated under strategic research plans that were def ned by a government agency. T is level of government involvement is considerable compared with that of North America (24%); in Asia, government agencies initiated six of nine consortia. Scientif c needs were not the only driver of collaboration; 36% of all government-initiated consortia had secondary objectives of economic development, and ~20% of the 369 consortia sought to advance regulatory science through the participation of a regulatory of cial in the consortium's research or on an oversight committee (7).Mechanisms of collaboration. T e m o dels used to structure a consortium ref ect the requirements of their sponsors, complexity of the science being pursued, resources available, type of output expected, and methods for sharing output with the public. Despite these dif erences, we found some common features among the collaboration models used by the 369 consortia studied. T e majority of consortia had clear mission statements outlining the targeted deliverables and timefra...

show abstract

Opening Up to Precompetitive Collaboration

Cited by 52 publications

References 14 publications

Accelerating Cancer Therapy Development: The Importance of Combination Strategies and Collaboration. Summary of an Institute of Medicine Workshop

Accelerating Cancer Therapy Development: The Importance of Combination Strategies and Collaboration. Summary of an Institute of Medicine Workshop

Recherche précompétitive, une mise en synergie des ressources publiques et privées : pour quels objectifs, comment et dans quel cadre juridique ?

Consortium Sandbox: Building and Sharing Resources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About