In Vivo analyzed recent public and private device financings to determine the comparative strengths and weaknesses of the various types of device financings, and further broke down the investments by therapeutic categories to examine what areas are hot and which ones are not. We found that the device industry has rebounded from a dismal public market and is showing strength among both public and private investors, resulting in a sector well-positioned for continued growth.

A Reprint--see the article of the same name in In Vivo, May 2008.

Tempo Pharmaceuticals produces nano-sized therapeutics designed to deliver a one-two punch: the targeted and sequential release of two drugs at a specific location in the body. Though the technology offers an improved way to deliver drugs, especially highly toxic chemotherapeutics to treat cancer, the company shies away from the drug delivery label. The company says its technology isn't just about getting drug into a tumor; it's about getting the right drug to the right location at the right time to address the microenvironment of the disease.

The private sector, short of funding, is finding NIH a useful source of support. As large-scale biomedical research becomes prevalent and as industry's early-stage R&D productivity falters, both parties have an interest in collaborating more than in the past. But in general, NIH isn't set up to manage the transformation of so many promising discoveries into clinically useful products. It's determined to change that situation with the introduction in October of this year of a "roadmap" for collaborations of many kinds. Even before this event, however, NCI, the largest institute within NIH, had undertaken several public-private programs to expedite development of new products. The institute's experiences illustrate some of advantages and pitfalls of public-private initiatives.