Millennium Makes Its Case as a Drug Developer
Executive Summary
Millennium claims to have an edge over Big Pharma and big biotechs: an evolved biology-driven approach to discovery and development derived from its roots in genomics, and a corporate culture based on integrating outside technologies that minimizes the Not-Invented-Here syndrome. Skeptics point to the fact that of the hundreds of targets it delivered to partners, none has resulted in a clinical candidate. Nonetheless, Millennium believes it now has a critical mass of knowledge about biological pathways that it can use for shrewd in-licensing and to choose those internal targets from which it will develop small-molecule drugs. But whether R&D proves to be a fertile source of internally discovered compounds or a sophisticated adjunct for licensing and development, Millennium's real challenge is to build a commercial organization and prioritize programs and capacity as it redirects its spending downstream.
You may also be interested in...
Millennium: The Risks of Forward Integration
Millennium Pharmaceuticals has been spending much of the new century building a development organization. Much of this nuts-and-bolts endeavor came out of its acquisition of Cor Therapeutics in 2001, a transforming transaction that has delivered only mixed results, and has now put the company on a hard-to-steer and equally hard-to-alter course.
Millennium: The Risks of Forward Integration
Millennium Pharmaceuticals has been spending much of the new century building a development organization. Much of this nuts-and-bolts endeavor came out of its acquisition of Cor Therapeutics in 2001, a transforming transaction that has delivered only mixed results, and has now put the company on a hard-to-steer and equally hard-to-alter course.
What Keeps Cancer Drug Developers Awake at Night
The range of comments, as well as the general tone, of a recent clinical cancer meeting prompted us to ask developers of cancer drugs what they saw as the major issues and hurdles in designing and testing new compounds. Their comments suggest that empirical methodologies, albeit informed by understanding of the biology around a target, will dominate clinical thinking in the near term. Clinical setbacks over the past several years, a lack of validated biomarkers, and an awareness that preclinical models are of limited utility in establishing dose and identifying likely responders, have reinforced that perception. Developers' principal concerns therefore often focus on things that are within their control; in particular, how to resource and manage a program for the long haul.