Category: Business District / EDC / Government

Key Takeaways

• Innovation performance in biotech clusters depends on organizational density, research capacity, and technology transfer systems.
• Some European clusters generate scale through metropolitan concentration, while others rely on distributed regional or cross-border networks.
• Centralized research campuses and networked clinical ecosystems represent different models for translating scientific discovery into development pathways.
• Commercialization can be institutionalized within research environments or mediated through ecosystem-level coordination across independent actors.

This article is the second installment in a series examining the structural architecture of Europe’s biotechnology clusters. The first article introduced four institutional models of regional innovation, showing how different governance arrangements and spatial configurations shape the organization of scientific and industrial activity. Structural design, however, does not fully explain how clusters function in practice. Regions that appear similar in scale or reputation often differ substantially in how they generate knowledge, mobilize resources, and convert research into commercial outcomes.

To understand these differences, it is necessary to look inside the operational core of each ecosystem. Innovation capacity depends on the density of organizations participating in the system, the scale and configuration of scientific infrastructure, and the institutional mechanisms that move discoveries from laboratory environments into market and clinical application. These factors determine how effectively clusters transform research activity into economic and therapeutic output.

In this installment, we examine three interrelated dimensions that define the internal mechanics of regional biotechnology systems: ecosystem scale and organizational density, research capacity and scientific infrastructure, and commercialization and technology transfer mechanisms. Together, these elements describe how innovation is produced and translated within Europe’s major life sciences clusters.

Ecosystem Scale and Organizational Density

Differences in cluster design become especially visible when comparing ecosystem scale and organizational density. The number of companies, workers, and institutions concentrated within a region shapes not only its economic weight but also the structure of collaboration and competition inside the cluster. Some European biotech hubs operate through dense metropolitan concentration, while others distribute activity across broader regional or cross-border systems. These structural choices influence how knowledge circulates, how quickly firms form and scale, and how resilient the ecosystem becomes over time.

Company Concentration

The United Kingdom’s Golden Triangle exemplifies high organizational density anchored in major metropolitan and university centers. London alone hosts thousands of life sciences companies, the large majority of them small and medium-sized enterprises, reflecting a highly layered ecosystem of startups, specialized service providers, and established firms operating in proximity. This density supports frequent interaction among research groups, investors, and commercial actors, reinforcing the region’s role as a major center for company formation and early-stage development.

Cambridge adds further depth to this concentration. The local cluster includes hundreds of life sciences organizations and contributes substantially to national economic activity, indicating not only the number of firms present but also the intensity of their output and integration into the broader economy.¹ Together, London, Oxford, and Cambridge form a corridor in which organizational scale arises from the cumulative presence of multiple dense local clusters rather than from a single dominant city.

In the Nordic context, organizational scale often appears in more regionally defined concentrations. The Stockholm–Uppsala region, for example, contains a large share of Sweden’s life sciences companies and workforce, making it a focal point of national industry activity. This concentration is reinforced by the presence of a substantial number of companies operating within the region’s boundaries, creating a localized but nationally significant center of biotechnology development.

Medicon Valley presents a different configuration of scale, defined not only by the number of companies but also by the size of its workforce and institutional base. The region encompasses more than a thousand life sciences companies employing tens of thousands of people, reflecting both a large industrial footprint and a deep integration of research and clinical infrastructure.² Organizational density here is shaped by cross-border integration, combining the resources of two national systems into a single functional ecosystem.

Regional Population and Economic Base

Organizational scale is closely tied to the broader population and economic environment within which clusters operate. Paris-Saclay illustrates this relationship particularly clearly. The agglomeration includes hundreds of thousands of residents and tens of thousands of companies, creating a substantial economic base that supports scientific and industrial activity.³ Its concentration of researchers and laboratories further reinforces the region’s capacity to sustain large-scale research and development, linking demographic scale to scientific productivity.

The Nordic innovation landscape follows a more distributed pattern. Rather than concentrating national activity within a single metropolitan region, life sciences capabilities are spread across multiple hubs that each host significant but distinct concentrations of firms, research institutions, and clinical infrastructure. Stockholm–Uppsala, Medicon Valley, and Oslo each serve as focal points within their respective national or cross-border contexts, creating a networked structure in which scale emerges through the combined activity of several regional centers rather than through a single dominant cluster.

Structural Implications

These variations in scale and distribution produce different structural dynamics within Europe’s biotechnology landscape. Dense metropolitan clusters, such as the Golden Triangle, generate scale through proximity, concentrating companies, capital, and infrastructure within a tightly linked urban corridor. This configuration supports rapid interaction and specialization but also depends on sustained physical expansion and infrastructure development to accommodate continued growth.

More distributed systems, including Germany’s regional model and the Nordic multi-hub landscape, generate scale through geographic dispersion. Innovation is distributed across multiple centers that remain connected through national coordination or cross-border collaboration. In these environments, organizational density is lower at any single location, but aggregate capacity across the network can rival that of more concentrated metropolitan regions.

The contrast between these approaches highlights a fundamental structural choice. Some clusters achieve scale by concentrating firms within highly dense urban environments. Others achieve comparable influence by distributing activity across multiple specialized regions linked through institutional coordination. The resulting variation in organizational density shapes not only how biotechnology ecosystems grow, but how they manage risk, allocate resources, and sustain long-term development.

Research Capacity and Scientific Infrastructure

If organizational density reflects the economic scale of a cluster, research capacity defines its scientific depth. The concentration of researchers, laboratories, and experimental platforms determines not only how much knowledge a region produces but how quickly that knowledge can be tested, validated, and translated into development pathways. European clusters vary widely in how they organize this scientific capacity. Some concentrate research assets within tightly integrated environments, while others distribute them across institutional networks that function collectively rather than spatially.

Research Workforce Concentration

Paris-Saclay is one of Europe’s most concentrated research environments. The cluster includes tens of thousands of researchers working across public and private institutions, supported by a large number of laboratories and research organizations operating within a single geographic area.³ This density reflects deliberate planning and sustained investment aimed at assembling a critical mass of scientific talent in close proximity. The scale of the workforce, combined with the diversity of research institutions present, creates conditions in which interdisciplinary collaboration and shared infrastructure can operate at unusually high intensity.

Medicon Valley organizes research capacity differently. Rather than concentrating researchers within a single campus environment, it integrates academic institutions and clinical facilities across a broader cross-border region. Universities, academic hospitals, and research centers operate across both Denmark and Sweden, forming a combined research system that functions as a unified scientific environment despite spanning national boundaries.² The presence of numerous hospitals engaged in clinical research strengthens this structure, linking laboratory investigation directly to patient-based research settings. Research workforce concentration therefore exists at the level of the region rather than within a single geographic core.

Laboratory and Experimental Infrastructure

Laboratory and experimental infrastructure further differentiate these models. Paris-Saclay contains hundreds of laboratories and extensive shared research facilities, supported by a large portfolio of experimental platforms designed to enable advanced scientific investigation across multiple disciplines. These platforms provide specialized equipment and technical capabilities that can be accessed by multiple research groups, reducing duplication while increasing experimental throughput. The resulting infrastructure supports a highly centralized model of scientific production in which researchers operate within a shared technical environment.

In the Nordic context, experimental capacity is more closely tied to clinical infrastructure. Medicon Valley’s research system is deeply integrated with hospitals engaged in clinical investigation, allowing experimental work to move rapidly into patient-based research settings. Rather than concentrating laboratory platforms in a single location, the region links research institutions and healthcare providers across multiple sites. Clinical research becomes a distributed infrastructure that supports translational work across institutional boundaries.

Translational Implications

These structural differences shape how knowledge moves from discovery to application. High levels of spatial concentration, such as those seen in Paris-Saclay, create dense research environments where experimental resources, personnel, and institutional support are tightly integrated. This configuration can accelerate early-stage scientific investigation by reducing physical and organizational barriers to collaboration.

Networked systems, such as Medicon Valley, emphasize continuity between laboratory research and clinical application. By integrating hospitals, universities, and research institutions across a shared regional framework, they support translational pathways that extend beyond a single campus or research district. Scientific activity unfolds across a connected institutional landscape rather than within a single centralized facility.

The contrast highlights a broader structural distinction between research mass and research connectivity. Centralized experimental environments assemble large concentrations of infrastructure in one location. Distributed clinical research systems link multiple institutions into a coordinated network. Both generate substantial scientific capacity, but they organize the relationship between discovery and application in fundamentally different ways.

Commercialization and Technology Transfer Mechanisms

Scientific discovery alone does not produce a functioning biotechnology economy. Clusters must also develop mechanisms that convert research outputs into companies, products, and clinical programs. These mechanisms take different institutional forms across Europe. Some regions embed commercialization directly within formal research structures. Others rely on ecosystem organizations that connect independent actors across a wider geography. Still others coordinate translation through regional networks that support multiple local innovation systems simultaneously. These differences shape how discoveries move from laboratory insight to market-facing activity.

Institutional Commercialization Structures

In the Paris-Saclay model, commercialization is built directly into the institutional architecture of the research environment. Technology transfer and financing mechanisms are embedded within the cluster, providing structured pathways for moving intellectual property from laboratories into commercial development. Dedicated organizations support this transition by funding maturation of research outputs and facilitating their movement into industrial application, allowing discovery and commercialization to operate within a unified institutional framework. Because these mechanisms are situated within the research environment itself, they function as an extension of the scientific enterprise rather than as external market intermediaries.

In the United Kingdom’s Golden Triangle, commercialization relies less on a single institutional structure and more on ecosystem-level coordination. Organizations such as MedCity operate as connectors, linking universities, research institutes, investors, and companies across London, Oxford, and Cambridge.⁴ Rather than controlling the commercialization process directly, these entities facilitate relationships that enable independent actors to collaborate. Translation occurs through interaction among universities, venture capital, specialized service providers, and emerging firms distributed across the corridor. The process is mediated by network connectivity rather than centralized institutional control.

Germany’s BioRegions introduce another configuration, one organized around regional coordination rather than campus-level or corridor-wide integration. Each BioRegion supports local commercialization through collaboration among universities, research institutes, and industry partners, while national coordination bodies align activities across regions. Technology transfer remains locally embedded, but regional initiatives operate within a broader national framework that promotes cooperation and shared strategic direction. Commercialization thus occurs through a layered structure combining regional specialization with national coordination.

These approaches demonstrate that commercialization mechanisms can be institutional, networked, or regionally coordinated. The underlying objective remains the same — enabling research outputs to become economically productive — but the organizational pathways differ substantially.

Incubation and Innovation Support Environments

Innovation support infrastructure provides another lens through which commercialization models diverge. Paris-Saclay concentrates incubation and commercialization support within its campus ecosystem, aligning laboratories, experimental platforms, and technology transfer structures within a single spatial environment. This proximity allows early-stage ventures to access technical resources and institutional support without leaving the research environment. Commercialization becomes closely intertwined with the physical and organizational structure of the campus.

Network-oriented systems distribute innovation support across multiple sites. Medicon Valley, for example, includes numerous science parks, incubators, and accelerator environments spread across its cross-border region. These facilities operate within a broader ecosystem that links universities, hospitals, and companies across Denmark and Sweden. Rather than concentrating incubation within a single location, the region provides multiple entry points for venture formation and development, connected through regional collaboration.

Germany’s BioRegions similarly support innovation through localized environments embedded within regional clusters. Science parks, research institutes, and commercialization initiatives operate within individual regions while remaining linked through national coordination structures. Each region develops its own support environment tailored to local strengths, contributing to a distributed network of innovation infrastructure across the country.

Structural Implications

These variations reveal two broad models of translation. One institutionalizes commercialization within formal research structures, embedding technology transfer and venture support directly inside the scientific environment. The other relies on ecosystem connectivity, where independent organizations coordinate activity across geographically distributed actors.

Campus-centered systems emphasize proximity and institutional integration. They concentrate resources and decision-making authority within a unified environment designed to move discoveries efficiently toward application. Network-mediated systems emphasize coordination among autonomous participants. They rely on relationships, mobility, and shared infrastructure to connect research and commercial activity across broader territories.

Both approaches support the movement of knowledge from discovery to development, but they differ in how they organize responsibility, risk, and resource allocation. Institutionalized translation centralizes control within structured environments. Ecosystem-mediated translation distributes it across interconnected actors. These structural choices influence not only how commercialization occurs, but how innovation systems evolve over time.

Differences in scale, research capacity, and commercialization structures reveal that Europe’s biotechnology clusters generate innovation through distinct operational pathways. Some rely on concentrated organizational density, others on large research platforms, and others on institutionalized translation systems that connect discovery to industrial development. These internal mechanics shape how knowledge circulates and how new enterprises emerge within each region.

Yet the ability to produce innovation does not, by itself, determine long-term competitiveness. Clusters must also sustain expansion, replenish their workforce, coordinate governance, and maintain the physical and clinical infrastructure required for continued growth. Innovation ecosystems function over time only when these supporting systems operate in alignment.

The next article examines these structural conditions. It explores the institutional and material foundations that allow biotechnology clusters not only to generate scientific and commercial activity, but to scale, stabilize, and endure.

References

1. Community & Cluster Dynamics: How life science clusters can enrich local communities. MedCity. 2022.

2. “About MVA.” Medicon Valley Alliance. Accessed 19 Feb. 2026.

3. “Join Us: Paris-Saclay.” Communauté d’agglomération Paris-Saclay. 2025.

4. “Accelerating cutting-edge life science innovation in London.” MedCity. Accessed 19 Feb. 2026.

Originally published on PharmasAlmanac.com on March 3, 2026.

Montana’s life sciences industry is thriving. With biotech companies clustered around the state’s major universities and an ever-expanding job market, the potential for opportunity matches the unique quality of life that only Montana can provide. Pharma’s Almanac Editor in Chief David Alvaro, Ph.D., spoke to Sharon Peterson, the Executive Director of the Montana Bioscience Alliance, who has witnessed the growth in the state’s industry over the last 15 years. She explains why now is an especially key time to be a part of life sciences in Montana and her vision for the future of the state’s numerous startups.

David Alvaro (DA): Can you tell me a little bit about yourself and current role at Montana Bioscience Alliance?

Sharon Peterson (SP): I actually spent 25 years working for the U.S. Senate for Senator Max Baucus from Montana as his state director. He then became Chairman of the Finance Committee, during which time I learned a lot about health care, including Medicare and Medicaid.

Following this role, I was recruited to help form the Montana Bioscience Alliance in 2004. It has continued to grow annually, and I’ve been there since the beginning.  

DA: Can you expand on the history of Montana Bioscience Alliance, including its original vision and mission and how that has evolved to where it is today?

SP: Our mission statement has remained the same despite being refined over the years; we connect the state’s biotechnology companies, clinics, universities, entrepreneurs, laboratories, and hospitals. Montana is a large state with many health corridors. However, when we first started, people were not networked with each other and would seek out partners in other states before turning locally. Montana’s life sciences industry is still not well-publicized — but we aim to turn this around.

We formed the Montana Bioscience Alliance in response to a study conducted by the governor indicating the growth potential for health-related industry in the state. We then started actively contacting people and recruiting members — and it’s only continued to expand.

DA: Is the state’s bioscience industry clustered around a few key cities or spread across the state?

SP: It’s clustered around our major research universities, which are in Missoula, with the University of Montana, and Bozeman, which is Montana State University. There is another pocket near Missoula at Hamilton, where Rocky Mountain Labs, which is a NIH facility, is located, and GlaxoSmithKline has a manufacturing facility there. That is the major area where we’re trying to push for an expansion.

In Billings, which is in eastern Montana, we have a huge medical corridor and several research facilities. A common path is for a university professor is to get a patent and then form a small company while continuing to teach.

DA: Is there more representation among university spinoffs and young biotech companies? Do the bigger players have a presence in the state?

SP: GlaxoSmithKline is our largest member, and they’re in Hamilton, Montana. A local resident, Edgar Ribi, started Ribi Immunochem, which was acquired by a company that was eventually acquired by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). They just invested over $100 million in their new facility, which will produce the adjuvant for the Shingrix vaccine as well as the HPV vaccine. GSK is internationally renowned for its adjuvant offering, and the company is active with the Montana Bioscience Alliance.

A few years ago, GSK closed their research and development business at the facility to strictly manufacture, and thus let their research people go. The former staff moved on to the University of Montana in Missoula and have since founded Inimmune, which is focused on allergy, autoimmune diseases, and cancer research and is now up to 60 employees.

DA: In a lot of cases where there’s a hub that’s spinning out of a university, you end up with a cluster of similar companies because they’ve originated from a single department. Has that been the case in Montana, or do companies represent the spectrum of possibilities within bioscience?

SP: It extends across the spectrum of possibilities. Inimmune’s conducting research in several different areas, including oncology. There are a few spin-off companies dedicated to cancer research in Bozeman. Another company called FYR Diagnostics is focused on COVID-19 testing, which has contributed to their expansion. There’s also Two Bear Capital, which is an investment firm in Flathead Valley that has contributed funding to those companies and encouraged them to stay in Montana.

DA: How have things been trending recently? Is there more growth for certain types of companies or an acceleration of development overall?

SP: There have been significant changes over the last few years, and COVID especially contributed to this shift. Our life sciences companies were deemed essential, and they took on this responsibility by increasing their outputs and working harder. Receiving an influx of investment capital in this state has also been a critical difference-maker, and I’m sure the industry will only continue to flourish.

There was an incubator formed a few years ago called MonTEC that helped a lot of our startups advance; however, it is now full and looking to expand. Although we get a lot of contact from companies that want to move to Montana, there is limited lab space.

DA: What is Montana’s government is doing to encourage bioscience or new industry investment overall?

SP: The state is actually very active. Montana has a program that offers a payout for workforce training. We also have a matching grant program for Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs and, in 2019, we were the first in the nation for the percentage of successful SBIR applications, beating out California. There’s an organization in Bozeman called TechLink, which aids in helping candidates fill out SBIR and STTR applications, which has been quite successful. When we first started the Montana Bioscience Alliance, people would ask me about available jobs and I couldn’t respond with certainty, but now there is a strong demand — and there’s tremendous competition for lab techs  

DA: What are the reasons why someone might want to move to Montana for work? Likewise, why would a business owner want to establish their company in Montana and take advantage of the available workforce?

SP: We enjoy a high quality of life. On Inimmune’s website, they show pictures of the staff going out fishing in the Clark River, which is adjacent to the facility. Another perk is that our population is comparatively small, so the drive to work is short. The mountains are right nearby, allowing for recreational outdoor opportunities. Most Montana folks have a great workforce ability; meaning that we have people who work hard. Again, that same Inimmune video highlights students continuing research, which is another option. The universities have had to expand their workforce, and the two-year colleges are offering certificates in bioscience.

We currently have 4,200 jobs in Montana in the bioscience industry, that pay an average of $85,000. That’s a lot higher than most salaries in Montana, and some are much more than that. 

DA: Is there anything else you can tell me about any particular initiatives that are going on and what your current strategic goals are?

SP: The Montana Bioscience Alliance was fortunate enough to receive a Cluster Initiative Grant from the Small Business Administration. The goal of that grant is to expand bioscience businesses in the state, which has been successful so far. We put out a directory annually that locates the bioscience businesses. We also have an initiative right now that we put together with seven Montana cities to expand lab space, as that’s been an issue.

However, above all, having capital in place is a constant challenge. While we want to be able to grow these businesses and expand, we don’t want the companies to be acquired and then move out of state.

DA: There’s a distribution of bioscience hubs across the country at different levels of maturity. When you think about your goals for Montana, are there any other states that you look to as models?

SP: When we first started the Bioscience Alliance, we were mentored by Colorado Bioscience. We’re the state affiliate for the national BIO organization, and we’re also a part of the Council of State Bioscience Associations — so we mentor and are mentored. When we first started, we worked closely with Colorado and Washington State. They were both bigger and had more activity, but we participated in investment conferences and the like.

Now we work more with New Mexico, Utah — the Rocky Mountain states that are smaller and expanding. The Council of State Bioscience Associations has been really wonderful for us. We formed in 2004, and we joined BIO in 2005. At that time, there might be 15 people in attendance for a meeting at the Council of State Bioscience Association — now that engagement is closer to 100.

DA: Can you tell me about the Montana Bioscience Alliance Hall of Fame?

SP: Maurice Hilleman, who developed the vaccine for measles and mumps and saved millions of lives, grew up in Miles City, Montana and got his four-year degree at Montana State College, which is what it was called at that time. He kept his Montana values throughout his whole career. There’s a Maurice Hilleman scholarship at Montana State University for students interested in immunization. More notable figures include Irv Weisman from Great Falls, Montana, who is famous for his work in stem cells out of Stanford; he got his start as an intern at the McLaughlin Research Institute in Great Falls. Leroy Hood is also from Montana originally. The latest notable figure is Dr. Marshall Bloom, who runs the NIH facility in Hamilton and is a fabulous person. He’s also a famous fly fisherman and writes articles about the sport.

DA: You mentioned how investment in the space was impacted by COVID. What else can you tell me about what the pandemic was like in Montana, the path to recovery, and the broader impacts?

SP: The situation has been difficult, because we have a lot of folks who don’t believe in the vaccines. The hospitals have been full and overflowing with people in hallways. The situation also became completely politicized. The mandate just came through, so it’ll be interesting to see.

However, testing and receiving the vaccines to start with was a real challenge because of how they were rolled out. Even those who are immunocompromised had to fight for an appointment. The testing was also difficult in the beginning, but now that is much improved. As a silver lining, our enterprises benefited and grew; there’s a group out of Bozeman that does wastewater testing to measure COVID rates that has been very successful because of the pandemic.

DA: Over the next decade, what do you anticipate is very likely to happen regarding the bioscience industry, and what do you hope to happen beyond that?

SP: I expect we’ll continue to expand. There are more jobs in Montana year over year. I don’t know if we’ll be able to recruit more companies into Montana, but it’s a definite possibility, especially as more people start companies.

I believe that we’ll increase the lab space all over the state, and companies will grow in places like Billings and Great Falls. I’m hopeful that we’ll demonstrate the state’s possibilities by advancing new technologies, platforms, and therapies. Some of these biotechs are starting clinical trials, and we hope that these scientists will soon be added to Montana’s list of notable figures.

DA: Are there any other significant industries in the state that compete for talent with bioscience?

SP: We have a sizeable Bozeman population that specializes in photonics, because it is taught at Montana State University. However, the industries are largely complementary, and a photonics background benefits bioscience overall.

DA: Is there anything else you’d like to add as a final thought?

SP: I can’t stress enough what a great place Montana is and how everyone should consider the life and industry here. We’re exempt from the problems that some of the big cities have, though we have myriad opportunities. Especially now, there is so much momentum in life sciences — and it’s only going to accelerate.

Originally published on PharmasAlmanac.com on December 8, 2021.

The Cell & Gene Therapy and Connected Health Initiative of the Chamber of Commerce for Greater Philadelphia’s CEO Council for Growth is bringing the community together to drive growth in the cell and gene sector with the goal of advancing Greater Philadelphia as a leading global hub in the field.

The Original Home of Cell and Gene Therapy

The cell and gene therapy field got its start in Philadelphia two decades ago. Discoveries originating here have led to a total of five U.S. FDA-approved cell and gene therapies have their origins in the Greater Philadelphia region, including Kymriah™ (Novartis Pharmaceuticals), the first FDA-approved cell therapy, and LUXTURNA™ (Spark Therapeutics), the first FDA-approved gene therapy.

Today, that high level of research in the cell and gene therapy field continues in the city. Within the overall Greater Philadelphia healthcare ecosystem, there are 15 major medical systems that support patients, renowned researchers, and novel drug developers, including those involved in the commercialization of innovative cell and gene therapies.

Overall, asserts Parviz Shamlou, who is Vice President & Executive Director of the Jefferson Institute for Bioprocessing (JIB) at Thomas Jefferson University, “Philadelphia and the Greater Philadelphia region have a very rich history in excellent translational research.”

Prioritizing Greater Philadelphia as a Hub of Cell and Gene Therapy Research

In 2019, the Philadelphia CEO Council for Growth launched the Cell & Gene Therapy and Connected Health Initiative to leverage the region’s specialized assets with the goal of accelerating growth and ultimately expanding Greater Philadelphia’s recognition as the global hub of research, talent, capital, and companies in cell and gene therapy, gene editing, and connected health, according to the Council’s Executive Director Claire Greenwood. Key components of the program include shared storytelling; the development of critical infrastructure; talent assessment, attraction, and training; and the building of a scalable ecosystem.

“The importance of the Cell & Gene Therapy and Connected Health Initiative is to put greater Philadelphia on the global stage as a hub of cell and gene therapy. We are focusing not only on our internal stakeholders but in bringing the message to the external audience as well. We are working to get our messaging out, telling our story in-market to build ambassadors in the community and out-of-market to attract interest outside of Greater Philadelphia,” Greenwood says. She adds that the Initiative is a unique program not seen anywhere else because it brings both science and non-science-based companies and organizations together to build an economic growth strategy.

Driving Towards Commercialization

The cell and gene therapy industry is benefiting from the heavy concentration of research activity in the Greater Philadelphia region. “The Philadelphia area is widely known for very successful gene and cell therapy companies,” observes Maria P. Limberis, Vice President of Research at Spirovant Sciences.

Today, more than 40 companies in the area are developing cell and gene therapies (up from 30 three years ago). There are also many support firms and several fully integrated global biopharma companies in the area. Overall, there are 70,000 employed in the life sciences industry in the region, and more than $1.25 billion in venture capital was raised by Philadelphia-area life sciences firms in the first half of 2021.

Focusing on cell and gene therapy, since 2018, companies spun out from Penn alone, such as Cabaletta Bio, Tmunity Therapeutics, Passage Bio, Imvax, and Century Therapeutics, have raised more than $1.5 billion in investment capital. Cabaletta Bio, Castle Creek Bio, Century Therapeutics, and Passage Bio have all issued IPOs since 2019 (DealForma 2021).

“One of the things the Initiative is emphasizing is the core science that has been established in Greater Philadelphia, which is a real advantage in the cell and gene therapy space. Many of the academic research institutions in the area made commitments to the science — beginning more than 25 years ago — and we are now seeing the commercial fruit of that activity,” Greenwood states.

Attracting Entrepreneurs and Talent

That long-term research commitment and increased commercial activity is attracting talent and expertise to the Greater Philadelphia region. Between 2010 and 2020, Philadelphia County’s biotechnology research and development sector added 4,510 jobs, an increase of 787% (Bureau of Labor Statistics, July 2021). The cell and gene therapy workforce is expected to grow 35–94% in the next 10 years, using midrange projections. That could account for 6,558–9,396 jobs (Econsult, 2019).

In fact, the Greater Philadelphia area is ranked second best globally for attracting entrepreneurs and skilled technology graduates (JLL, 2019) and fourth for medical research and health services (CBRE, 2019). In addition, in 2018 the Philadelphia Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) had the second-highest number of job postings for “cell therapy” and “gene therapy,” following Boston but surpassing New York City (Source: Burning Glass Technologies, 2019). Furthermore, there are 38 four-year colleges offering programs related to life sciences in the region, producing over 18,500 life sciences/STEM degrees in 2017 (Newmark Knight, 2019), with slightly more than half of the college graduates remaining in the Philadelphia area (Campus Philly, 2018).

“Today, there are nearly 1000 IND [Investigational New Drug] studies underway in the Philadelphia area that are in early clinical phases, and over 300 of those are in cancer. These discoveries need to be translated into practical medicines that are safe, efficacious, and affordable. As a result, there is a great deal of opportunity for talented people who want to build their careers in Greater Philadelphia,” comments Shamlou.

Providing Practical Training

The Jefferson Institute for Bioprocessing (JIB )at Thomas Jefferson University is one good example of the important infrastructure that exists within the life sciences ecosystem in the Greater Philadelphia area.  It was established, Shamlou says, to address a significant gap in existing workforce training in the biomanufacturing space. “We created the Institute for Bioprocessing to specifically train and educate next-generation scientists and engineers who wish to develop their careers in biomanufacturing. We have 25,000 square feet of space in which we simulate the GMP manufacturing environment using state-of-the-art single-use technologies from Cytiva for the production of biologics, including cell and gene therapies,” he explains. Both companies and people looking to work for them benefit from this specialized training.

Getting Noticed

All of the cell and gene therapy development activity in the Greater Philadelphia region has not gone unnoticed. Philadelphia was named an emerging New World City for innovation in healthcare and life sciences by JLL in 2019 and considered among the top 20 cities for excellence in innovation (JLL, 2019). It was number 7 on Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News’ (GEN) top-10 list of biopharma clusters in March 2021, on Hickey and Associates’ list of 2020 Top 25 Global Innovation Hubs, and number 6 in the 2020 JLL Life Sciences Real Estate Outlook. The Greater Philadelphia region is also consistently ranked among the top 10 U.S. life science hubs.

Connected Across Life Sciences and Health

In addition to driving cell and gene therapy research, Greater Philadelphia is taking the lead in connected health technologies that will improve patients’ lives. One notable example is Quil Health, an Independence Blue Cross and Comcast joint venture to develop a patient-centered technology and communications platform that will improve overall efficiency and experience of the care delivery process between providers and patients.

Other connected care startups in the area include EIR Healthcare, which won the Fast Company’s 2019 Innovation by Design Award in healthcare; Astarte Medical, a Yardley, Pa.-based software company in the precision medicine space; Panorama Medicine, which uses genomics and computing to accelerate drug discovery; HealthVerity, which creates cloud-based software-as-a-service platforms for pharmaceutical companies, payers, and other health care organizations; and Oncora Medical, a developer of software for the management of cancer patients. Meanwhile, Haystack Informatics, which applies behavioral analytics technology to hospital operations to drive efficiencies and safeguard data privacy, was acquired by Latric Systems, and healthcare payments tech firm InstaMed was acquired by J.P. Morgan Chase. 

Direct Benefits for Cell and Gene Therapy Developers

One of the newer companies attracted to the Greater Philadelphia region is Spirovant Sciences, which is developing genetic therapies for diseases that affect the lung. Its first targeted indication is cystic fibrosis (CF), a devastating disease that causes severe respiratory distress. Existing treatments help 80–90% of CF patients, according to Maria P. Limberis, VP of Research at Spirovant Sciences Inc., but, for people with certain mutations, current therapies are ineffective.

“Spirovant’s adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapeutic is designed to deliver a functional CFTR gene to the diseased CF lungs to improve lung function, allowing people with CF to have an improved quality of life and live longer,” Limberis says. 

When Spirovant sought a place in which to locate, the company wanted to be in an area that offered a combination of academic institutions and the infrastructure needed to support the expansion of biotechnology firms. “Philadelphia was the logical choice,” asserts the company’s CSO Roland Kolbeck. “We are involved in basic biology through clinical translation. In the Greater Philadelphia area, there are world-renowned scientists and clinicians that work in the field of cystic fibrosis and respiratory diseases as a whole. University City in the heart of Philadelphia was a very easy choice to make as the prime location for Spirovant,” he comments. 

Limberis adds that the proximity to both renowned academic institutions and other biotechnology companies that work in gene and cell therapies is instrumental to leveraging all of the combined knowledge, numerous opportunities for communication, and talent that is attracted to the area. “As more companies move to the region, there is a positive feedback loop that drives even greater interest,” she believes.

Coming Together as a Community

Philadelphia and its surroundings have been a hotbed of pharmaceutical companies for many years, even more so than New York and New Jersey, according to Dave Goswami, CEO and Chairman of IPS – Integrated Project Services, LLC, one of the fastest-growing companies in the AEC (architecture, engineering, and construction) industry.  

“The center of the city is home to a number of universities and teaching hospitals, and the talent pool in the area is tremendous. With the industry changing, moving toward new technologies like mRNA, and cell and gene therapies increasing, there is an even greater need for science, and that science has been established from the outset here in the Greater Philadelphia area. IPS was started back in 1989, as a unique firm focused on delivering design–build services on an integrated platform for the life sciences industry, and we have been doing business in the region since then. It is a special place,” he concludes. IPS has benefited from the talent pool in the region, hiring an extensive roster of subject matter experts, renowned in their field, providing solutions that help pharmaceutical companies create and manufacture life-impacting products.  

“The future for companies like Spirovant as participants in the Greater Philadelphia cell and gene therapy technology hub is very, very exciting,” Kolbeck adds. “This hub is basically the epicenter of cell and gene therapy, and over the next few years, it will become even more so, with a growing emphasis on clinical translation. Spirovant will be part of that by developing genetic therapies for cystic fibrosis and other genetic inherited childhood diseases that affect the lungs,” he says.

Greenwood, meanwhile, intends for the Greater Philadelphia area to be widely recognized as an important hub for cell and gene therapy, not just with respect to research but also for growing organizations that are fully integrated and present in the market. “That recognition is already rising, because we have come together as a community to tackle the talent and workforce needs of the sector by not only attracting key talent but also by building collaborative partnerships and solutions to really ensure that our local community is connected to these jobs as they grow and multiply. The result is an entire, fully integrated ecosystem that acts as a growth engine for the cell and gene therapy sector,” she contends.

Originally published on PharmasAlmanac.com on March 23, 2022.

With lessons learned from the pandemic, Northern Ireland is poised to become a location of choice for advanced pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturing.

The global response to COVID-19 has been awe-inspiring, with the life sciences industry rising to address this once-in-a-century challenge.

I am particularly proud of Northern Ireland’s contributions during the crisis. Our manufacturing sector quickly pivoted and is punching above its weight developing COVID-19 personal protective equipment (PPE), testing, diagnostics, and medical equipment. In one such example, County Antrim’s Randox Laboratories worked alongside Bosch to develop a rapid test in less than six weeks. It’s one of the world’s first fully automated molecular diagnostic tests and can detect a SARS-CoV-2 infection in under 2.5 hours.

The pandemic will profoundly and permanently change the life sciences sector, and one shift evolving in real time is the re-evaluation of global supply chains. Exploring the potential benefits of near-shoring and dual-source pipelines has become a priority to preserve the manufacturing and distribution of critical pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and supplies.

In this context, Northern Ireland is poised to expand its global impact as a location of choice for second-source manufacturing. 

Attractive Region for Life Sciences and Second-Source Manufacturing

With science-driven manufacturing, a long history of advanced engineering and manufacturing excellence, and a time zone centrally located between major global markets, Northern Ireland offers many advantages for companies looking to grow while diversifying and safeguarding their supply chains.

The Northern Ireland workforce is highly educated, English-speaking, and provides a talented pool to draw from, with both Ulster University and Queen’s University Belfast recognized as bioscience leaders. Our workers have adapted to working remotely and are supported by infrastructure necessary for effective digital operations. Operating costs are on average 20–30% lower than the rest of the UK and Europe. Salary costs are approximately 50% less than in the United States, but with science workers maintaining an excellent quality of life.

Companies investing in the region can access expertise and grants for product development, employment, training, and R&D. For life and health science companies in particular, R&D and manufacturing activities within Northern Ireland have remained robust throughout the pandemic, thanks to our infrastructure and ability to manage our own COVID-19 measures outside of the wider UK and EU response. This has enabled companies to maintain and even enhance their competitive position on a global stage.

Many international companies have realized the opportunities offered by this low-risk, pro-business environment. In 2019, investment in Northern Ireland grew by more than 60%, the largest increase ever, and the current pipeline continues to grow. More and more, despite or perhaps because of COVID-19, we are hearing from interesting life science and pharmaceutical companies looking for the right place to develop healthcare products and technologies.

Ecosystem That Drives Growth

Our universities, companies, regulatory authorities, and healthcare systems are highly connected and collaborate intimately in a way that doesn’t happen in larger countries or less integrated areas of a similar size. Pharma companies operating in Northern Ireland can support all aspects of the development cycle, from discovery through preclinical and clinical research to commercial manufacturing and life cycle management. 

Key to this is the direct link to the UK’s National Health Service, one of the world’s largest and most respected health services, and Northern Ireland’s data-driven, “closed loop” healthcare system, which has electronic health records for the population of 1.88 million, covering all phases of life.

Longitudinal data of this scope exists in very few places and offers opportunities for comparative efficacy research and data mining. Through ethical collaboration agreements, researchers can access this information to find ideal patient pools, even for more complicated diseases, creating an ideal environment for the co-creation, testing, evidence generation, and adoption of healthcare innovations.

Northern Ireland’s two major universities, Ulster University and Queen’s University Belfast, offer globally competitive research expertise, including 17 research centers between them, and an excellent track record in commercializing technologies.

The more than 250 life and health sciences companies operating in Northern Ireland take advantage of this ecosystem, including global names like Randox, Almac, Norbrook, Stryker, G&L Scientific, and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries. Small and medium-sized enterprises are an integral part of the cluster as well, including ProAxsis, Exploristics, Cirdan Imaging, CV6 Therapeutics, Fusion Antibodies, Intelesens, Kainos, Diaceutics, and AxisBioServices.

Together, companies of all sizes are focused on advancing pharma, diagnostics, precision medicine, connected health, and medical devices. This dedication has bred success, with the industry generating a turnover of more than $1.41 billion in 2019 and employing more than 8,500 people.

Expertise in Digital and Connected Health

There are also emerging cross-sector strengths in areas like AI and data analytics and existing expertise in areas like cybersecurity and software development. The intersection of so many fields, made possible because of the manageable size of the business environment, breeds innovation.

Ulster University’s Connected Health Innovation Centre is at the forefront of business-led connected health research, with a focus on the management of long-term chronic conditions. For example, they are doing significant work in the area of sensors, from those that monitor a patient’s health status and identify early signs of illness to those that track electrical responses in the brains of patients with neurodegenerative diseases, providing real-time feedback during clinical studies.

Underpinning the industry is a commitment to cybersecurity, never more important given recent cyber threats targeting organizations developing COVID-19 vaccines. Northern Ireland is home to the UK’s National Centre for Secure Information Technologies, located at Queen’s University Belfast, and has one of the highest concentrations of cyber employment in Europe, beneficial for companies looking to safeguard intellectual property and clinical data.

This integration of academic research, clinical practice, and technological expertise allows scientific programs to link directly to clinical outcomes, helping companies in Northern Ireland accelerate development efforts and be more successful much sooner than competitors.

This integration of academic research, clinical practice, and technological expertise allows scientific programs to link directly to clinical outcomes, helping companies in Northern Ireland accelerate development efforts and be more successful much sooner than competitors.

Growing the Northern Ireland Economy

The Northern Ireland government proactively supports the life sciences sector. As the region’s economic development agency, Invest Northern Ireland helps companies looking to establish operations in the region by brokering collaborations with local business, academia, and health organizations, providing funding, and advising on how best to scale. Essentially, Invest Northern Ireland is a catalyst helping companies identify the locations, people, and resources that will ensure success.

We’re currently excited about the recently launched “City Deals,” which include $1.54 billion worth of funding —an investment of $1,000 per person — in economic growth projects. Many will significantly enhance Northern Ireland life and health science capabilities, including new institutes for clinical research, digital healthcare technology, and longitudinal healthcare data capture.

Brexit and Beyond

As many are aware, Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. There’s been speculation about how the UK leaving the EU at the end of this year will impact Northern Ireland.

Although final agreements have yet to be inked, we anticipate that Northern Ireland may be the only jurisdiction with UK and EU regulatory overlap. This would provide the unique ability to trial, manufacture, and commercialize products and pharmaceuticals for both markets from one location. Nowhere else in the UK or EU will that 2-in-1 opportunity be possible.

This dual-market scenario would certainly enhance Northern Ireland’s potential for second-source manufacturing, but no matter how the policy shakes out, the building blocks for strengthening your supply chain remain: talent, time zone, and the intersection of science, technology, and manufacturing. 

Originally published on PharmasAlmanac.com on September 29, 2020.

Scotland has been at the forefront of science and industry for centuries, with Scots pioneering healthcare inventions, such as the hypodermic syringe, penicillin, general anesthesia, and a long list of other innovations that have changed the healthcare industry and human health as we know them.

At Entrepreneurial Scotland, we believe that Scotland should continue this tradition into the technological age by becoming a society of entrepreneurs as well. As an organization, we not only aim to inspire Scots to develop their business ideas; Entrepreneurial Scotland also gives them the tools to turn their business dreams into realities. Together with our international network of business partners, Entrepreneurial Scotland strives to motivate and invest in entrepreneurs by helping them make profitable connections and preparing them for the ever-changing business environment of the future.

How Entrepreneurial Scotland Is Bringing Its Mission to Life

Entrepreneurial Scotland envisions a future where Scotland is the most enterprising society in the world. To raise Scotland to the pinnacle of entrepreneurship, we must go beyond inspiring our future leaders to creating a support structure that will drive them to success. Entrepreneurial Scotland is tapping into our international network of world-class business partners and organizations to create and support a community of rising entrepreneurial leaders from around the world. With our help, these ambitious, globally minded individuals will strive to reach their full potential, becoming the next generation of entrepreneurs to drive Scotland to success.

With Entrepreneurial Scotland’s global partners, we have the unmatched opportunity to tap into the best minds in science and industry, allowing us to curate advancement and education opportunities that will propel future entrepreneurial leaders toward their goals. The opportunities we create — are tailored to transform our entrepreneurs’ ambitions into successful businesses.

We started Entrepreneurial Scotland in 2014 with the goal of making Scotland the most entrepreneurship-driven society in the world. Since then, we have gotten closer to our goal by leaps and bounds, but Scotland still has a long journey before it can reach its business-minded future. Going into our next phase as an organization, we have laid out a blueprint for what Scotland’s ultimate entrepreneurial society might look like, assessing possible challenges our organization and Scotland’s business landscape might face. Many of these challenges represent opportunities for our future entrepreneurs. With these challenges and opportunities in mind, we planned out ways our members and leaders can rise above possible setbacks and turn obstacles into chances to make Scotland a global economic powerhouse.

Our strategy centers around the concept of the virtuous circle. Entrepreneurial leaders gain success through our programs and then return to support future leaders through our organization. This virtuous circle feeds our four strategic priorities: driving entrepreneurial leadership, unlocking value through our peer network, nurturing the entrepreneurial ecosystem, and scaling up our organization.

Inspiring New Businesses That Fit Our Changing World

The world is changing, and Entrepreneurial Scotland will help Scotland change with it. Each change represents many opportunities for the nascent entrepreneurs being mentored by our organization. One challenge businesses are facing right now is the current pace of technological advances. With the present technological revolution coming at a rapid pace, business people with entrepreneurial mindsets will put their flexibility and forward-thinking attitudes to work. Entrepreneurial Scotland will cultivate the kind of flexible, innovative mindset that will prepare Scotland for progress and achievement in our increasingly technological world.

Similar opportunities await in shifts in the workforce. New generations are coming to work, bringing with them more advanced technological skillsets and different expectations for their companies. Younger workers and future leaders are more comfortable with uncertainty, and Entrepreneurial Scotland plans to equip them to meet even greater challenges as the new technological era unfolds. Collaboration and connection will be the keys to economic success. Rigid institutions with leaders who command from the top are failing. That is why we will train future leaders to manage their organizations like communities. Leaders who foster collaboration between their employees and who collaborate with them will be the ones who drive innovation in Scotland. Just as Entrepreneurial Scotland is stronger because of the varied expertise and talents of our members and partners, so are the businesses of the future.

Our Saltire Scholar Intern Program Lifts Up Future Leaders

In our world-class Saltire Program, we select high-achieving individuals in the early stages of their careers and set them up with internships inside global organizations renowned for their entrepreneurship. The program matches undergraduates from Scottish Universities with companies, charities, social enterprises, and small or medium-sized businesses in countries across the world.

These internship opportunities prepare the Saltire Scholars for their final year of university study, when they undertake commercial projects in Scotland and in the international arena. With the real-world experience provided by the Saltire Program, scholars gain a global perspective while cultivating an entrepreneurial mindset. In 2019 alone, 181 scholarships were awarded, and the scholars interned with 83 organizations in 61 towns and cities across 11 countries. Saltire alumni have gone on to found companies and become leaders in major organizations around the globe.

In the healthcare space, Saltire Scholars have studied at GlaxoSmithKline, Craneware, AstraZeneca, the Institute of Healthcare Improvement, and more. At these companies, scholars shadowed major thinkers in their future career fields, observing and sometimes helping out as their mentors led their companies toward innovation and excellence.

Guided by Our Leaders and Our Members

Entrepreneurial Scotland is for the many, not just the few, and our diverse community of more than 2,000 people shows that Scotland’s business landscape is better when we work together. Our community includes numerous individuals at every part of their entrepreneurship journeys, from current program members and program alumni to board members, founding funders, donors, corporate partners, sponsors, our AsiaPac advisory board, and foundation trustees in Scotland, the United States, and Canada. Our leaders have backgrounds in commerce, venture capital, manufacturing, banking, medicine, and many other areas, allowing our organization to engage with the international entrepreneurship community on multiple levels.

Fostering Entrepreneurship Will Forge a Better Scotland for All

Entrepreneurship is a mindset of forward-thinking collaboration and innovation. A society of entrepreneurs will be adaptable and ready for whatever the future might hold.

Our vision for Scotland is to have it become an entrepreneurial society with a purpose. An entrepreneurial Scotland invests in its communities. Investing in Scotland’s communities means creating jobs and futures full of possibilities for everyone. The more we invest in Scotland, the more pathways to entrepreneurship we can create, allowing each Scot to help shape the world into the place where they want to live.

By 2030, we envision a Scotland where new ideas and businesses thrive. By investing in ourselves and the next generations, we will pave the way to a better Scotland, a Scotland that shares its entrepreneurial spirit with the world.

Originally published on PharmasAlmanac.com on March 19, 2020