Showing 6 ideas for tag "industry"

Goal 3: Advance Translational Research

A Collaboration Market Place for Industry and Academia to advance Translational Medicine

There is a vast amount of data regarding specific gene and protein targets, especially in the post genomics era with many well validated targets, and even more "strong candidates". Drug companies have libraries of compounds that could be good inhibitors/enhancers for these new targets but lack an internal program, IP of the target, or a sufficiently large market to initiate risky and expensive drug screens, let alone... more »

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC

An NHLBI sponsored and funded "Market Place" could be set up to partner drug companies seeking funds to perform earlier phase screens with academic investigators seeking funds to learn more about their protein target or advance a therapy. NHLBI could fund a successfully paired collaboration up to 100% of the cost, with a sliding scale of matched-costs from the industrial partner based on their market capitalization (e.g. big Pharma at 100%, Medium Pharma at 50%, and early-stage Pharma at 0%)

Well thought-out global contractual agreements for "non-disclosure" and "IP sharing", beneficial to both parties before and after initial 'pairing' of a collaboration, would significantly enhance the speed and feasibility of the studies.

More compounds could be tested for more targets, addressing rarer conditions, or common conditions where only a small proportion of the affected cases are impacted by mutations or deficiency of the target proteins.

Drug companies would be incentivized to examine more targets without necessarily needing a large market for a future drug.

Later stage studies – pre-clinical, Phase 1, and Phase 2 – could then be re-championed at the Market Place for additional NHLBI funding, either with new partners or the same partners to further advance successful compounds.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC

Contractual negotiations between Industry and Academia/Clinicians is a significant barrier to Translational Medicine and personalized medicine in particular.

Often ideas are not shared simply due to a lack of non-disclosure agreements in place. A Market-place to share ideas behind a well-structured “non-disclosure” firewall at the NHLBI website would facilitate the speed of discussion and stimulate collaboration.

Funding within industry can be limited by board and share-holder goals. There is typically little incentive to advance translational programs at early stages with no or limited medium or long-term financial benefits. Providing funding to facilitate and perform these research collaborations would incentivize Pharma to collaborate with academics who may hold IP or data on novel targets discovered with NHLBI funding.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea PhDIdeas

Voting

27 net votes
45 up votes
18 down votes
Active

Goal 3: Advance Translational Research

Develop common-sense standards for obesity research

Obesity research is riddled with methodological problems that are rarely challenged, leading to the perpetuation of misinformation and interventions that do harm. Given the two-thirds of the population who are classified as higher weight and thus subject to these interventions, it is past time to clean up the basic scientific flaws in this research area.

For a quick summary of a couple of these issues, see Poodle Science:... more »

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC

This subject really is both CG and CC. The CQ aspect is to see past the weight bias and stigma we are all subject to in order to see diversity of weight as normal, even as people across the weight spectrum suffer health insults from sources that are rarely investigated within the medical model (cf social determinants of health). The CC aspect is the enormous economic and cultural pressures to maintain the valuing of some bodies over others in order to sell products and create a group of people who have fewer ways to defend themselves from oppression.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC

Several key areas could make a big difference and they are quite feasible.

  1. Require researchers to have studied weight bias and stigma so they are more aware of their own potential proclivities to frame research questions or results according to the status quo.
  2. Require any study that claims a weight loss finding to have, report, and publish followup data on all participants at least 2-5 years post-intervention.
  3. Require any study claiming a health issue related to weight to compare not higher and lower weight people, but rather higher weight people who have pursued weight loss and higher weight people who have not, since there is no way for higher weight people to be always-been-thinner.
  4. Require weight/health research to control for obvious confounders such as weight cycling, SES, exposure to weight stigma, exposure to weight discrimination, exposure to racism, exposure to stress, lack of access to unbiased medical care, etc.
  5. Require that journals allowing statements in the abstract or discussion or conclusions that generalize beyond the data be accountable, and that journals provide an accurate translation of the findings for journalists complete with statements about limitations of findings and possible alternative interpretations.
  6. Fund projects which are about listening, especially to people who are rarely asked about their lived experience, in order to generate better research that actually improves quality of life for higher-weight people.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea Deb Burgard, PhD

Voting

24 net votes
44 up votes
20 down votes
Active

Goal 4: Develop Workforce and Resources

Align PhD Content with Careers Available to Recent PhDs

There is a need to create better alignment between the content of biomedical PhD programs and the careers that actually are available to those who have earned PhDs. Though available data are surprisingly weak, all the evidence suggests that only a small fraction (perhaps 15%) of current biomedical PhDs and postdocs are likely to find stable careers in academic research. Larger proportions are more likely to be employed... more »

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? Critical Challenge (CC)

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea Michael S. Teitelbaum

Voting

4 net votes
14 up votes
10 down votes
Active

Goal 3: Advance Translational Research

Better collaboration with industry

There is a need for better collaboration with industry.

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? Critical Challenge (CC)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC

Promoting further academic‐industry interactions are likely to yield benefits, which will ultimately lead to improvements in the health of our nation.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea Research Advocacy Committee, American Thoracic Society

Voting

5 net votes
5 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Goal 4: Develop Workforce and Resources

Preparing a Diverse Biomedical Technology Development Workforce

How do we best develop a scientific workforce that is fluent in product development and commercialization issues? How can NHLBI best expand the training opportunities for early career scientists to prepare them for entry into the dynamic biomedical workforce landscape? There is a need for scientifically-trained experts from diverse backgrounds who also understand business needs relevant to biomedical technology development,... more »

Is this idea a Compelling Question (CQ) or Critical Challenge (CC)? Compelling Question (CQ)

Details on the impact of addressing this CQ or CC

A well-trained biomedical technology development workforce would enhance the quantity and quality of research translated from the lab to the market focused on heart, lung, blood, sleep indications. A better understanding of the product development pathway would improve efficiency and resource usage, and accelerate the time for products to reach the market. Structured training would better prepare academic scientists for industry collaboration and provide an industry-ready scientific workforce. Ensuring these training opportunities are inclusive of scientists from different backgrounds would increase the diversity of the biomedical technology development workforce.

Feasibility and challenges of addressing this CQ or CC

Industry is a large employer of research trainees, and trainees are becoming increasingly vocal about their interest in opportunities to be trained in areas beyond the academic lab that would prepare them for roles in industry. NHLBI can leverage recently launched educational opportunities, including the BEST (Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training), NCAI (NIH Centers for Accelerated Innovations), REACH (Research Evaluation And Commercialization Hubs), and CTSA (Clinical and Translational Science Awards) programs.
Transitioning scientific discoveries to inventions and products to benefit public health requires knowledge and education beyond what is traditionally learned during medical, graduate, and post-doctoral training.

Challenges to addressing this CQ include:

• Need for educators and mentors with relevant industry experience and expertise.

• This would be a culture shift in academic institutions, though the new NIH programs described above has already started to influence this shift.

Name of idea submitter and other team members who worked on this idea NHLBI Staff

Voting

0 net votes
19 up votes
19 down votes
Active