Keywords: Synairgen plc, Southampton, collaboration, spin-out, asthma, COPD

Similar documents
Intellectual Property

Intellectual Property Policy. DNDi POLICIES

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board. Policy on the Management of Intellectual Property

DOC-CAREERS II Project, Final conference Brussels 2012 University-Industry Intellectual property rights: Balancing interests

Engaging Industry Partners

EASY ACCESS IP AN INTRODUCTION FOR UTS RESEARCHERS FEBRUARY 2014 RESEARCH & INNOVATION OFFICE

Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Principles in the Conduct of Biomedical Research

Discovery: From Concept to the Patient - The Business of Medical Discovery. Todd Sherer, Ph.D.

POLICY PHILOSOPHY DEFINITIONS AC.2.11 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. Programs and Curriculum. APPROVED: Chair, on Behalf of SAIT s Board of Governors

Research and Innovation Strategy and Action Plan UPDATE Advancing knowledge and transforming lives through education and research

The IPR strategies of the Italian National Research Council and its researchers

WIPO Development Agenda

The 45 Adopted Recommendations under the WIPO Development Agenda

About the awards. Categories. Knowledge Transfer Initiative of the Year Knowledge Transfer Achiever of the Year. Judging panel

Research Patents in Biotech SMEs

THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CREATED BY STAFF AND STUDENTS POLICY Organisation & Governance

The Role of the Intellectual Property Office

CRS Report for Congress

The basics of successful IP-Management in Horizon 2020

PATENT AND LICENSING POLICY SUMMARY

Fact Sheet IP specificities in research for the benefit of SMEs

Technology transfer industry shows gains

Case Study HYDRO-COAT: Duly protecting research project results

Loyola University Maryland Provisional Policies and Procedures for Intellectual Property, Copyrights, and Patents

Innovation Office. Intellectual Property at the Nelson Mandela University: A Brief Introduction. Creating value for tomorrow

Key issues in building a strong life sciences patent portfolio. Tom Harding and Jane Wainwright Potter Clarkson LLP

A POLICY in REGARDS to INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. OCTOBER UNIVERSITY for MODERN SCIENCES and ARTS (MSA)

California State University, Northridge Policy Statement on Inventions and Patents

F98-3 Intellectual/Creative Property

NIHR ROADSHOW FOR MEDTECH SMES

Lexis PSL Competition Practice Note

ECU Research Commercialisation

The actors in the research system are led by the following principles:

MedTech Europe position on future EU cooperation on Health Technology Assessment (21 March 2017)

executives are often viewed to better understand the merits of scientific over commercial solutions.

Intellectual property governance and strategic value creation:

Identifying and Managing Joint Inventions

APEC Internet and Digital Economy Roadmap

An Essential Health and Biomedical R&D Treaty

A REVIEW OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THE IRISH TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SYSTEM

Policy Contents. Policy Information. Purpose and Summary. Scope. Published on Policies and Procedures (

Intellectual Property Management - How to capture, protect and exploit your ideas

School of Informatics Director of Commercialisation and Industry Engagement

Information & Communication Technology Strategy

EL PASO COMMUNITY COLLEGE PROCEDURE

Arlindo Oliveira. An Intellectual Property Strategy supporting Open Innovation

Intellectual Property Ownership and Disposition Policy

1. Recognizing that some of the barriers that impede the diffusion of green technologies include:

IMI2 Intellectual Property rules in light of Call 10 topics. Magali Poinot, IMI Legal Manager IMI Stakeholder Forum 28 September 2016

Technology and Innovation in the NHS Scottish Health Innovations Ltd

Parenteral Nutrition Down Under Inc. (PNDU) Working with Pharmaceutical Companies Policy (Policy)

Overview. How is technology transferred? What is technology transfer? What is Missouri S&T technology transfer?

European Charter for Access to Research Infrastructures - DRAFT

Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP)

POLICY ON INVENTIONS AND SOFTWARE

Draft for consideration

The role of patents in technology transfer

Insights: Helping SMEs to access the energy industry

COLLABORATIVE R&D & IP ISSUES IN TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER IN UNIVERSITY SYSTEM

University of Dundee. Design in Action Knowledge Exchange Process Model Woods, Melanie; Marra, M.; Coulson, S. DOI: 10.

Knowledge Exchange Strategy ( )

Public Research and Intellectual Property Rights

DRAFT Agenda. designed to Policy at. This one. and wrong! Content: level. the main. their. This day. dealing with

Technology Leadership Course Descriptions

New York University University Policies

NHS Next Stage Review: Innovation

Question Q 159. The need and possible means of implementing the Convention on Biodiversity into Patent Laws

Globalisation increasingly affects how companies in OECD countries

Policy 7.6 Intellectual Property Policy

University Senate agenda, June 5, 1986: PATENT AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER POLICY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The role of Intellectual Property (IP) in R&D-based companies: Setting the context of the relative importance and Management of IP

IP and Technology Management for Universities

Policy on Patents (CA)

The ALA and ARL Position on Access and Digital Preservation: A Response to the Section 108 Study Group

Guidelines for Facilitating the Use of Research Tool Patents in the Life Sciences. March 1, 2007 Council for Science and Technology Policy

Emerging biotechnologies. Nuffield Council on Bioethics Response from The Royal Academy of Engineering

Programs for Academic and. Research Institutions

Delivering the Commercialisation of Public Sector Science

INTERNATIONAL WINTER SCHOOL

The Biological and Medical Sciences Research Infrastructures on the ESFRI Roadmap

WORKSHOP ON BASIC RESEARCH: POLICY RELEVANT DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENT ISSUES PAPER. Holmenkollen Park Hotel, Oslo, Norway October 2001

Impact and Innovation in H2020 Proposals and projects

September 18, 2017 Special Called Meeting of the U. T. System Board of Regents - Meeting of the Board

Patent application strategy when, where, what to file?

Statement by the BIAC Committee on Technology and Industry on THE IMPACT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION ON INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT

UW REGULATION Patents and Copyrights

Managing Intellectual Property: from invention disclosure to commercialisation

Technology transfer offices: a boost to licensing in Mexico

Canada s Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy submission from Polytechnics Canada

UNIVERSITIES AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PATENT ATTORNEYS TRADE MARK ATTORNEYS

The role of university science parks in business-university research collaboration

PATENT ATTORNEYS TRADE MARK ATTORNEYS

Mr Hans Hoogervorst International Accounting Standards Board 1 st Floor 30 Cannon Street London EC4M 6XH. MV/288 Mark Vaessen.

Managing the University IP Office

Building Collaborative Networks for Innovation

A Science & Innovation Audit for the West Midlands

Interim Report on the Heiligendamm Process at the G8 Summit in Hokkaido Toyako 7 to 9 July 2008

University IP and Technology Management. University IP and Technology Management

Intellectual Property

Journey towards success: From idea to market a real case study. Dr. Wolfram Meyer Malta

Transcription:

Professor Stephen Holgate is a member of the Infection, Inflammation and Repair Division in the University of Southampton School of Medicine. He is a co-founder and non-executive director of Synairgen Ltd, a drug discovery company specialising in respiratory diseases with a focus on asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, which was spun-out from the University of Southampton s School of Medicine in June 2003. Dr Sue Edwards is a Life Sciences Business Manager at the University of Southampton s Centre for Enterprise and Innovation, and has also worked as a contract manager in the University s Research Support Office. Prior to joining the university in 2004 she worked for the UK biopharmaceutical company Celltech. Research collaboration and development of intellectual property with the University of Southampton in the field of asthma and COPD Stephen Holgate and Sue Edwards Date received: 11th October 2005 Abstract The University of Southampton, one of the UK s top ten research universities, has an active enterprise agenda encompassing commercial licensing, spin-out creation, commercial research collaboration, consultancy and staff development. Southampton aims to be a recognised world leader in its interactions with industry while maintaining the ethos of a leading academic centre of research and teaching excellence. This paper explores the creation of and ongoing relationship between Southampton and Synairgen plc, a spin-out from the University founded on its expertise in the field of asthma and COPD, as a case study of the benefits and balances to be found between academic, enterprise and corporate agendas. Keywords: Synairgen plc, Southampton, collaboration, spin-out, asthma, COPD Dr Sue Edwards Contract Manager (Biomedical/ Chemistry), University of Southampton, Research Support Office, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK Tel: +44 (0) 2380 598342 Fax: +44 (0) 2380 593585 Email: S.N.Edwards@soton.ac.uk SOUTHAMPTON AND SYNAIRGEN In June 2003, Synairgen was spun out of the University of Southampton s School of Medicine, founded on intellectual property in the asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) field from the Allergy & Inflammation Research Division (AIR) headed by Prof. Stephen Holgate. Synairgen is located in close proximity to the School of Medicine, and its three founding members retain their university positions. Southampton University and Synairgen enjoy a productive and synergistic research relationship where recognition of each other s primary drivers and constraints has enabled positive outcomes for both. In October 2004 Synairgen plc s shares were admitted to trading on the London Stock Exchange s Alternative Investment Market. Synairgen raised 10m (before expenses) and, in order to meet institutional demand, the university sold 400,000 shares for 0.5m, leaving the university with a balance of 3,600,000 shares, representing 16.6 per cent of the issued share capital. AIR is a highly successful research group which has, for several years, attracted significant levels of industrially sponsored or collaborative work, frequently involving disease-related human tissue and of significant mutual benefit. The scientific attractiveness of such projects to the university and commercial attractiveness to the collaborators is clear and, as ever, such collaborations require careful negotiation and management with respect to differing desires for publication and intellectual property rights. The university was aware, however, that it had significant intellectual property, developed outside such collaborations and using noncommercial funding, the value of which was not being realised through such collaborations. In seeking to balance the university s parallel aims of continued high-ranking research publications, achieving value from exploitation of its know-how and arising IP, and empowering its researchers to reach their 200 & PALGRAVE MACMILLAN LTD 1478-565X/06 $30.00 JOURNAL OF COMMERCIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY. VOL 12. NO 3. 200 204. APRIL 2006

Research collaboration and development of intellectual property Universities research rights goals, the university concluded that a spin-out company would be the most effective route. Synairgen s creation has the potential to create substantial value for the university, but has changed the landscape on which collaborative research is conducted by the university in the field of asthma and COPD. Both the university and Synairgen are working to operate to their benefit in this revised landscape and, where appropriate, to work in collaboration. BALANCING FREEDOM TO OPERATE WITH COMMERCIAL NEEDS A university s research activities may be considered as analogous to a coral reef. Life is concentrated at the outer edges but is built on the accretion of previous activity. If further growth is blocked, the affected area dies, and the contribution of previous years is nullified. Any licence or assignment arrangement which prevents use by a university of its research results or IP kills research activity. While it is now generally accepted practice that universities retain such research rights under most licence and assignment arrangements, there are areas in which this is problematic. Lead contenders in this category are fields of research that inherently tend to involve the use of proprietary research materials, techniques and expertise (or financial support in areas which funding bodies do not address) and therefore involve interactions with commercial entities. Not surprisingly, many exclusive licensees or assignees of intellectual property consider permitting this to be an unacceptable erosion of their rights. In the arrangements between Southampton and Synairgen the continued activity of the founding scientists in their academic roles, in addition to Synairgen roles, has been a powerful force in helping reconcile these apparently conflicting objectives. Synairgen recognised that it was in its best interests for the university group to remain a vibrant expanding research presence, with the potential to provide further licensable intellectual property and expert collaboration. Equally, the university recognised that it would be imprudent to establish a spin-out and then undermine its business plans by seeking to continue business as normal. An arrangement was therefore agreed under which the university is able to undertake commercial collaborative work unless it conflicts with Synairgen s interests, and a mechanism is provided to ensure that the university s research goals are not frustrated outright in such circumstances. This arrangement is working well, and the university is pursuing collaborative research projects that would have been impossible in the case of a blanket ban on commercial collaboration, and are of little import to Synairgen. This ability of AIR to conduct collaborative projects with other commercial entities, many of whom have both cutting edge research programmes in this area and a history of collaboration with AIR, is highly significant both for AIR s continued research strength and for the economy of the School of Medicine. COLLABORATING WITH SYNAIRGEN As Synairgen is now an independent entity, its dealings with the university must clearly be conducted at arm s length on the same terms as for any other commercial entity wishing to work with the university. Southampton is fortunate in that separate offices deal with commercialisation of intellectual property (Centre for Enterprise and Innovation) and research contracts (Research Support Office). Thus the university staff dealing with contract negotiations for further research contracts are distinct from those who were involved in the setting up of the company, and who may have ongoing involvement in the company. Equally the university has processes for managing conflicts of interest, including where academic staff are employees or directors of contracting companies, which operate to ensure financial transparency and & PALGRAVE MACMILLAN LTD 1478-565X/06 $30.00 JOURNAL OF COMMERCIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY. VOL 12. NO 3. 200 204. APRIL 2006 2 0 1

Holgate and Edwards Synairgen s collaboration with Southampton s School of Medicine preserve the interests of the university and especially those of its researchers involved in such programmes but not otherwise linked to such companies. The ability of Synairgen to invest significantly in developing the platform of technologies originally licensed to them by the university, and to actively market itself and seek further commercial partners, provides a knock-on benefit to the university in terms of additional collaborative projects flowing into the university via Synairgen and from which the university receives appropriate financial recompense and publication benefits. COLLABORATING WITH THE UNIVERSITY Part of Synairgen s technical platform is in vitro models relevant to asthma and COPD. These models utilise human cells in order to overcome the deficiencies of standard available in vitro models for these diseases, which have arguably hampered scientific and medical advance in these fields. In order to access the human materials required for these models, Synairgen has been collaborating with Southampton s School of Medicine to develop Synairgen s biobank of disease-relevant samples. For Southampton, the ability to meet the requirements of the regulations introduced over the past few years relating to clinical trials and samples (ie the UK Department of Health Framework for Research Governance and the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004) has been critical to ensuring the continued ability of the university to undertake clinical research, whether investigator or commercially led. The university has worked closely with Southampton University NHS Trust to ensure that the necessary research governance processes are in place and work efficiently. Without the involvement of the School of Medicine s researchers it would be extremely difficult for Synairgen to build this resource by direct interaction with the NHS. Equally, this is an example of how the symbiotic relationship between the University Medical School and the NHS is necessary to enable effective medical research, a factor of which the university must be ever mindful in any collaborative arrangements that it enters into. DEVELOPING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WITH SYNAIRGEN For the university, Synairgen provides a licensee for further intellectual property in the field where the university can achieve a double win of licensee fees and potentially increased value in its shareholding. Furthermore, there is a reasonable expectation that Synairgen will understand the nature and potential of any such items licensed and be positioned to progress their exploitation effectively. Clearly, in any such licence arrangement the university needs to ensure that it achieves fair market price, and that no university employee is placed in a situation of conflict where they might feel pressured to advise the university inappropriately with regard to the value of such intellectual property. All too frequently, universities suffer from the too early too late conundrum with respect to their intellectual property, such that when its invention is patentable, the degree of available proof is insufficient to interest potential licensees, or that once such proof has been obtained, it is either no longer possible to obtain patent protection or the expense of maintaining patent applications can no longer be supported. In the UK, government and venture capital-backed early project development funds have gone some way to assuaging this dilemma; however, a spin-out company with directly relevant expertise and the ability to employ research staff without publication imperatives represents another highly effective means of reducing such intellectual property wastage. 202 & PALGRAVE MACMILLAN LTD 1478-565X/06 $30.00 JOURNAL OF COMMERCIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY. VOL 12. NO 3. 200 204. APRIL 2006

Research collaboration and development of intellectual property Balancing interests DEVELOPING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WITH THE UNIVERSITY For Synairgen, its contractual arrangements with the university provide a route to obtain licences to further relevant intellectual property developed by the university. In this way Synairgen benefits from a cutting edge to its pipeline, while allowing its research management to concentrate on the later stage research work being carried out on its own programmes. This applies both to product-related opportunities and keeping Synairgen s technical abilities up to date, a vital factor for most companies and particularly those in high-technology areas. Again, for the university this provides a route for effective commercialisation for technical developments that it would otherwise be difficult to obtain significant value from. THE RESEARCHER S PERSPECTIVE For the university s research employees, whether directly linked to Synairgen or not, the collaborative links with Synairgen provide additional depth to their understanding of the relevance of their work, the operation of the commercial sector and opportunities for progressing their research interests. Such exposure is particularly beneficial to researchers in the early stages of their careers by increasing the scientific and commercial horizon apparent to them and thereby benefiting the overall science base, particularly in the UK where academic and commercial researchers have frequently swum and progressed their careers within separate pools, with little mobility or even understanding between them. Such segregation cannot be beneficial to either science or the economy and all forms of academic commercial scientific interaction have beneficial potential in this context, regardless of more apparent outputs. For those involved in the scientific foundation of Synairgen and who have also continued their university work, this dual role provides a further dimension in which our science can be explored, allowing greater total scope of scientific progress. This should not be automatically equated with greater flexibility as the balancing act of our joint responsibilities and the arrangements in place between the company and university can require advanced navigational skills; however, we remain confident that a way through can be found for most issues. BALANCING INTERESTS WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY Finally, it is worth touching on the internal compromises made by universities in their interactions with commercial collaborators and licensees. The primary drivers for universities will clearly include scientific value and its recognition through publication, financial returns, both immediate and on any further intellectual property, and the encouragement and facilitation of enterprise activities of its researchers (in the case of the UK in accordance with governmental directives). However, each of these drivers may belong to different individuals or departments/interest groups within that university and some may be relevant to more than one such grouping with conflicting aims. For example, a principal investigator may be more concerned on a given project with keeping a key researcher employed between grants than with publication, but the head of their research division may be more concerned by timely publication for inclusion in the RAE (a publication-based assessment exercise whereby the research excellence ratings of institutes divisions are determined, forming the basis for future core governmental research grant allocations). Alternatively an investigator may be concerned primarily with publication whereas the administration may be concerned with ensuring that the project will not incur a financial loss. Universities individual structures vary in their effects and flexible approaches will operate on a case-by-case basis. It is therefore worth emphasising again that & PALGRAVE MACMILLAN LTD 1478-565X/06 $30.00 JOURNAL OF COMMERCIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY. VOL 12. NO 3. 200 204. APRIL 2006 2 0 3

Holgate and Edwards those entering into collaborative arrangements need to have, and critically communicate both to each other and their legal colleagues, their key objectives in entering into such arrangements, otherwise it is entirely possible to head for a lose lose situation without either party really understanding how it has happened. 204 & PALGRAVE MACMILLAN LTD 1478-565X/06 $30.00 JOURNAL OF COMMERCIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY. VOL 12. NO 3. 200 204. APRIL 2006