The future of biopharma is on my mind, and frankly, I'm worried. As a former head of Pfizer R&D and now a senior director at PureTech Health, I've seen firsthand the industry's evolution, and I'm concerned about the path we're on.
Back in July 2006, I sat down with a young reporter from The New York Times, Alex Berenson. He was there to get my take on Pfizer's R&D prospects, using our company as a lens to understand the broader pharmaceutical industry. And it was a crucial time to do so. The industry was in a productivity slump. In the 1990s, the FDA approved a whopping 311 new medicines. But, despite significantly larger investments in R&D, the following decade saw only 235 approvals. This was a concerning trend, and many industry insiders were starting to believe this was the new normal.
But I had a different perspective. I believed the 2000s would mark a major turning point. We were on the verge of a new era, fueled by breakthroughs in understanding the root causes of diseases, thanks to the unraveling of the human genome. Plus, we were starting to appreciate the potential of drugs beyond traditional small molecules, like antibodies and therapeutic vaccines. I was convinced that the pharmaceutical industry was about to experience a surge in productivity, leading to major advancements in treating conditions like cancer and diabetes.
I suspect Berenson saw me as overly optimistic. He (or his editors) even titled his article "Dr. Optimistic."
What do you think? Do you agree with my assessment of the industry's potential, or do you share the concerns of those who saw a more pessimistic future?
