In the world of drug discovery, pharmaceutical companies face a very sobering statistic – more than 90% of the drugs that reach clinical testing will fail. This high failure rate is not only a major financial concern for the pharma industry, but it also negatively affects the millions of patients that are sick and desperately waiting for new medicines. Reducing the clinical failure rate is a critical step in creating a more successful and sustainable pharmaceutical industry.

Low success in drug develop necessitates pre competitive collaboration. Image from www.nih.govLow success in drug development necessitates pre competitive collaboration. Image from

Researchers in pharma/biotech and academia faced a similar challenge during the late 1980s and early 1990s with AIDS/HIV. At that time, the scientific community was able to rapidly and successfully develop several anti-HIV drugs thanks, in no small part, to the use of pre-competitive research collaborations. Janet Woodcock, director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), writes, “precompetitive research is a subset of translational research that focuses on improving the tools and techniques needed for successful translation, and not on development of a specific product.”

In a precompetitive collaboration, a variety of different organizations (that typically would compete with each other) work together or share information. For AIDS/HIV research, partners that worked together precompetitively included pharmaceutical and biotech companies, academic research centers and government research institutes.

Pharmaceutical companies have historically done all of their drug discovery research in house. But in the last 10 years, it has become increasingly clear that the pharmaceutical industry must change its research model if it is to remain viable. Challenges facing the industry include:

  1. Increasing cost of research coupled with abysmal rates of clinical success
  2. Expiration of patent protection leading to loss of exclusivity (the so-called patent cliff)
  3. Competition from biosimilars and generics

To address these challenges, some pharmaceutical companies are, for the first time, engaging in precompetitive partnerships with other pharma competitors, with government organizations and with academic research centers. For example, the large pharma company GlaxoSmithKline recently formed a precompetitive collaboration with the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute and the European Bioinformatics Institute to establish the Center for Therapeutic Target Validation (CTTV). The three organizations will pool resources to discover new potential drug targets that all of the partners will be able to access.

Similarly, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched a precollaborative effort called the Accelerating Medicines Partnership (AMP) to identify efficacy and safety issues for compound collections that serve as the starting points for many new drug discovery projects. By working precompetitively to identify compound liabilities early in the research process, it is hoped that everyone will benefit from reduced clinical failure rate.

Additional precompetitive partnership examples include the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) in Europe, the Critical Path Institute (CPI) in the US, the Structural Genomics Consortium (SGC) and Oxford University’s Target Discovery Institute (TDI). These partnerships are specifically geared toward translational research that will lead ultimately to the commercialization of new medicines.

Pharmaceutical companies and other large research organizations are beginning to work together precompetitively in other ways as well. Pfizer, AstraZeneca, the US National Cancer Institute and a host of other biotech, pharma and academic organizations have worked together with Assay Depot to create preclinical research marketplaces that share precompetitive information. Each Assay Depot client has its own private research marketplace but the underlying supplier and service databases are shared precompetitively. In 2015, some of the pharma companies will begin sharing supplier ratings as well.

Precompetitive research partnerships can, at times, be difficult to manage owing to the size and bureaucratic nature of large research partners. At times there are also legal challenges involving intellectual property rights that are often difficult to overcome. Nevertheless, the pooling of resources early in the drug discovery process, before a drug candidate has been selected for the clinic, should have an outsized effect on pharma productivity, leading to both increased innovation and reduced costs.

That said, it is important to understand that the time to act and establish precompetitive collaboration is now; as Janet Woodcock says in her article, “(T)he success of the drug development enterprise over the next decade may be at stake.”

Posted 8:01 am,

From the desk of Chris Lipinski, PhD I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how to optimize for ligand affinity. Of course, this is a central theme of all drug discovery projects. At its core is the question of how physical and chemical relationships guide the interplay between the ligand, the protein target, and the […]

Posted 1:40 pm,

Anyone who has taken a general laboratory class knows that the lab manual has multiple protocols that one follows in order to complete each week’s assignment. However, while the class laboratory protocol has been thoroughly tested, academic and industry protocols are often changed and improved as new information is gleaned from previous experiments. A new […]

Posted 11:09 am,

Drug discovery, ever a challenge, can be likened to a tall structure. The upper stories rely on the stability of the floors below it, and a solid foundation is a must. No lofty heights will be reached when the base is not secure. And so, it is not a surprise that a drug discovery project […]

Posted 10:36 am,

“Innovation” is suddenly the word on everybody’s lips.  Pfizer launched “Centers for Therapeutic Innovation”, Johnson and Johnson followed with their “Innovation Centres” and now Merck followed with their “Innovation hubs”.  In fact, it happened so fast that many of us in the dusty halls of academia are still trying to get a grip on what’s […]

Posted 1:06 pm,

Sometimes, in tragic circumstances, a lesson can be learned and applied in unexpected ways. That appears to be the case with a rare disease that produces debilitating symptoms in children – but might also offer clues to developing a new class of antivirals. The particular disease, an extremely rare congenital disorder called CDG-IIb,  affects the […]

Posted 9:52 am,

We have recently discussed here how crowdfunding — donations from the general public in support of a cause, idea, or invention — has caught the attention of scientists seeking financial backing in an era of tight budgets. The brave new world of crowdfunding in science raises questions that defy easy answers. What is essential to […]

Posted 12:28 pm,

Connecting academic scientists to the global life science ecosystem Like everyone else, academic researchers are finding that funding sources are drying up and that they somehow must do more research work with less money. To do something about it, a group of Universities in Missouri and Kansas have teamed up with Assay Depot to create […]

Posted 11:39 am,

As we previously discussed, CRISPR-mania is sweeping the globe. (Okay, it might not be as big as Beatlemania, but more than a few life science researchers have probably squealed in delight.) The CRISPR system, derived from bacteria’s fight against viruses and tailored so that it can snip away genetic material in other organisms, has generated […]

Posted 2:26 pm,

It’s a sad story that everyone is familiar with: A patient takes one or more well-known cancer drugs, and they work — for a while. However, after the respite, the cancer comes roaring back, this time impervious to the once powerful effects of the cancer drugs. Many people would view the disease’s return with resignation […]

Posted 1:52 pm,