Where does all the R&D money go? Somehow I get the impression that developing a new drug involves way too many people and processes and that disintermediation and automation along the R&D chain could greatly simplify and cheapen the process.
First of all, you need the brains to develop the drug. I can't imagine that this involves a team much larger than a pre-series A startup.
Does the development process for creating a new drug promote failing fast?
Does keeping the entire R&D process in house help or hinder?
How far can a team get before it needs to try a drug on humans and how much does it cost to get that far?
Are there any startups that just manage a portfolio of patients with symptoms/diseases/disorders and automatically pair those patients with drugs that might benefit them?
Should the process allow the patient to "price" his or her own life/health, whereby patients can opt in to Phase 1 trials for a lot more money than Phase 2 for example and name their own price in the process?
How much of the money spent is actually (time*wages) for a lot of people for an unnecessarily long process? Is burn rate a consideration when creating a new drug? How long does it take to get a drug to market? Can price be reduced by half by reducing the time it takes by half? Do a lot of people in the process spend their time waiting?
Is drug development in the US far more expensive than elsewhere because the entire healthcare system here is more expensive (vicious cost cycle / positive feedback loop)
Anyways, just tossing some ideas out there because I get the suspicion that pharma R&D is ridiculously archaic.
I don't have exact numbers on this, but it seems like a lot of the early stage research happens in very small teams at universities and biotech companies.
Then large companies like Bayer acquire the research and spend millions on getting it through FDA process.
I know advancements are being made in automation for various research activities and I'm sure there will continue being a lot of advancements there. (The need for automation is fully recognized at the industry level)
First of all, you need the brains to develop the drug. I can't imagine that this involves a team much larger than a pre-series A startup.
Does the development process for creating a new drug promote failing fast?
Does keeping the entire R&D process in house help or hinder?
How far can a team get before it needs to try a drug on humans and how much does it cost to get that far?
Are there any startups that just manage a portfolio of patients with symptoms/diseases/disorders and automatically pair those patients with drugs that might benefit them?
Should the process allow the patient to "price" his or her own life/health, whereby patients can opt in to Phase 1 trials for a lot more money than Phase 2 for example and name their own price in the process?
How much of the money spent is actually (time*wages) for a lot of people for an unnecessarily long process? Is burn rate a consideration when creating a new drug? How long does it take to get a drug to market? Can price be reduced by half by reducing the time it takes by half? Do a lot of people in the process spend their time waiting?
Is drug development in the US far more expensive than elsewhere because the entire healthcare system here is more expensive (vicious cost cycle / positive feedback loop)
Anyways, just tossing some ideas out there because I get the suspicion that pharma R&D is ridiculously archaic.