Investing in Problem-Solving, Not Product: PureTech’s “Proactive” Approach

PureTech Health (PRNewsFoto/PureTech Health)

Step into the sixth floor offices of PureTech Health in downtown Boston and you may feel that you’ve dropped into a rabbit hole and right into a lush wonderland of wall-to-wall greenery. It’s a surprising interior for the otherwise nondescript office building on the heavily trafficked Boylston Street.

But the unique décor might provide a clue about how this innovative company, run by CEO Daphne Zohar, operates. Referred to as an intellectual property (IP) commercialization company, one of a rare breed seen in the U.S., it licenses and develops health tech and life sciences patents from academic and independently-run labs. The model is common in the U.K.–PureTech Health went public on the London Stock Exchange this past May, raising nearly $200 million—but is radically different from how typical biopharma or venture capital firms operate.

“We start with the problem–take obesity or other disorders, like schizophrenia, ADHD–where we feel like there really isn’t a very good way to address it, and we bring together a network of 50 plus experts from around the globe, people who have really thought deeply about this problem and others who may be in slightly different disciplines,” explains Julie DiCarlo, PureTech’s SVP of Communciations and Investor Relations. “They look at the problem from different perspectives and start vetting potential technologies or science to address it. So it’s really different than a company that might say, ‘Here’s a really cool technology that we want to invest in.’”

After the think tank identifies potentially useful innovations, PureTech tests the concepts to see if previously reported results are reproducible. DiCarlo adds, “From there, we might find that there’s one that really stands out as a really potentially exciting and game-changing opportunity and if it passes all of our rigorous tests, we’ll start a company around it.”

This process of search and discovery has lead to the founding of some of the most innovative healthcare-focused companies, with diverse treatments ranging from drugs and biologics, to devices and digital health.

Akili Interactive Labs develops video game therapies for treating cognitive disorders, which have been found to improve cognitive ability and executive function among the elderly. In the future, Akili hopes to also develop treatments for those suffering from disorders like ADHD, autism and depression.

Vedanta Biosciences hopes to treat autoimmune and infectious diseases by modulating a patient’s microbiome. At this stage, Vedanta is isolating specific strains of organisms in order to learn which combinations result in particular, desired phenotypic expressions and outcomes.

Gelesis has developed an oral hydrogel capsule for the treatment of obesity (and related disorders, such as diabetes) which works mechanically, causing early satiety and decreased appetite, before dissolving and being eliminated by the body.

Tal Medical is working on a tabletop medical device (modeled like a much smaller MRI machine) that has been shown to rapidly reverse depression through neurostimulation. A single treatment with the device has been found to have an effect equal to four to six weeks of traditional pharmacologic treatment.

PureTech has 12 companies currently in their portfolio with a goal to add an additional one to two each year. Although each is independently-run, they are all majority-owned by PureTech, sometimes for the long-term. This approach allows for more flexibility than at a typical life sciences or VC firm. These companies have the potential to become completely independent, be sold to larger biopharmas, develop partnerships with other healthcare organizations, or may be retained by PureTech to continue growing the company’s product lines.

Executive Vice President of Science and Technology Erik Elenko calls PureTech’s approach “100 percent proactive.” “Think about a typical entrepreneur who has one technology and they [sic] get really excited about it but there could be 10 others out there. We’re reaching out to people, we’re not having companies come and pitch us…The key is that you start with a problem and come up with a solution, rather than investing in a technology which may or not be useful.”

The company also draws on a large, interdisciplinary panel of experts—including outside experts in addition to members of its own scientific advisory board—who look at complex healthcare problems from a multitude of angles. Among the most valuable and in-demand consultants are those working in digital health. According to Elenko, healthcare and IT have radically different cultures and “different ways of approaching the world,” so finding individuals that have connections in both worlds is invaluable in solving today’s complex healthcare challenges.

PureTech has ambitious plans for the future.

“If you look at our fundamental goal, it’s to solve the most difficult healthcare problems that exist through interdisciplinary and unexpected solutions,” shared Elenko. “Success is getting therapies to market for patients, reaching more patients through partners and helping patients by looking at their toughest problems.”

This article was originally published on MedTech Boston.


Cool Startup: RubiconMD

RubiconMD team sitting 2

Primary care practice stands on the precipice of radical transformation as emphasis shifts from offering volume-based to value-based care. Look no further than the recent Supreme Court ruling to see that the ACA and its mission are becoming further cemented into the U.S. healthcare system. The goals are lofty: higher quality and greater access to healthcare at a lower cost. For most, it’s hard to imagine what this healthcare landscape will look like in the future.

But Gil Addo, the CEO and founder of the NYC- and Boston-based healthcare startup RubiconMD, seems to know. His novel vision of the future involves shaking up the traditional model of primary and specialty care practice in medicine.

A Yale and Harvard Business School graduate, Addo’s experience as a consultant and in commercializing innovation has included industry stints at both large and small tech and biotech companies. In early 2013 he met co-founders Dr. Julien Pham, a physician formerly on faculty at Harvard Medical School, and Carlos Reines, another Harvard MBA.

As of December 2014, they have raised over $1.4 million funding and support from major investors, including athenahealth and Waterline Ventures.

We sat down with Addo recently to talk about this innovative company and discuss his plans for the future.

Tell us about what you do at RubiconMD.

RubiconMD is meant to enhance access and bring appropriate specialist expertise into the primary care setting. The patients will see their primary care providers and whatever the issue is–if it is outside the PCP’s expertise and results in a referral—the physician can upload any relevant information, such as images, labs, and studies, and ask questions. We figure out who the most appropriate specialist is and then route the case to them so that they can respond within a few hours.

That’s the crux of the entire interaction. It’s a clinician-to-clinician electronic consult.

How did you get the inspiration to start RubiconMD?

I was very interested in this problem of enhancing access and wanted to find a way to solve it. I had a personal experience that motivated me to take this on. I had a grandmother who had to travel thousands of miles to Boston for treatment of a brain tumor, and then back and forth for all the follow-up. Why couldn’t her local provider oversee her care with appropriate support? There had to be a better way.

I traveled to India and looked at different healthcare delivery models and found that better way. There they have an extreme version of what you see everywhere: the appropriate expertise is in a concentrated area and people are everywhere else, so they bring the appropriate expertise into community health centers.

I started iterating on that model and borrowed things from other settings until I arrived at a solution that fit the U.S. healthcare market. RubiconMD allows increased access to the right specialist and brings that expertise into the primary care setting, to the front line.

How did you figure out if this might be something that primary care physicians would actually be interested in?

Once we figured out that the idea made sense at a system level, we had to figure out if this was a solution that physicians would use. Julien brought his clinical expertise and introduced the idea of “curbside” interaction, an informal and natural way that physicians interact with each other. We were able to validate the model on a small scale and see that physicians would actually use it and find value.

We ran a larger scale pilot to see if this would save people money. We used two large clinics with a panel of specialists and ran it across 15 or so specialties. The findings have been remarkably consistent.

  • In a third of the time, this support avoids a specialist visit. This has been consistent across all deployments and different populations.
  • Another third of the time this process improves the referral. You’re able, even though you’re referring, to send along the appropriate labs and studies and waste less time. And you make sure the patient goes to the right specialist.
  • For the remaining third of the time, it’s peace of mind. It validates what you were going to do.

The cost savings is from improving care outcomes and avoiding duplicate and inefficient use of resources. Almost $300/per opinion is saved, aside from other benefits such us reducing wait time and avoiding ancillary costs to patients.

Is this billable to insurance?

It is not. Right now, we work with value-based organizations incented to provide high quality primary care in the most affordable way possible who see this as a way to extend their capabilities, provide better and more timely care in the primary care setting and avoid unnecessary services.

Payers show interest, as this is a great tool to enhance outcomes and reduce costs while improving patient satisfaction.

What are the challenges that you’re having? 

No shortage of challenges. We focus on the sphere of healthcare that is value-based and incented to provide high quality care at the lowest cost. But U.S. healthcare still has a very large fee-for-service component and the biggest challenge is that we’re dealing with so many groups fighting themselves. It’s a system in transition. We’re trying to bring this into that environment and show them how we help them transition. It’s tough but enough of the market has moved and enough changes in primary care have happened that we have been able to gain momentum quickly.

What are your next goals, short-term and long-term?

Short term, we want to continue better servicing our customers, provide better tools to meet their needs and fit even better into workflow. We’re obsessed with enhancing workflow and not making additional work — providing a tool that syncs with the way physicians want to practice medicine.

Long term, we’re focused on the idea of democratizing medical expertise. As our longer-term vision, we want this to be the default. We want people to think of RubiconMD as the way to get high quality consults more efficiently and locally so that there’s no barrier for clinical expertise.

This article was originally published at MedTechBoston.com.

Cool Startup: GenoSpace

daniel meyer

Healthcare is drowning in a deluge of data. Decision-makers must somehow make sense of a heterogeneous array of information — demographic, clinical, patient-generated, treatment and outcomes data. The latest waves of information also include data from mHealth and genomic sources. It’s not hard to imagine that many in the healthcare industry suffer from information overload and struggle with a bit of ‘analysis paralysis.’ How can organizations make sense of all this big data and actually harness it to improve healthcare and outcomes?

One company helping answer this question is GenoSpace, an ambitious genomic and health data management startup based in Cambridge, Mass. Its current chairman, John Quackenbush, and CEO, Mick Correll worked together in the Center for Cancer Computational Biology at Dana Farber before co-founding the company in 2012. Contracts with notable customers like the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) and PathGroup funded GenoSpace before the first round of outside funding in 2014.

It was around that time that GenoSpace hired Daniel Meyer, an entrepreneur with a background in venture capital, as Chief Operating Officer. According to him, it was GenoSpace’s ability to attract high-quality customers early on (a rarity for most early-stage companies in life sciences) that convinced him to join. Recently, we sat down with Meyer to learn more about how GenoSpace helps healthcare organizations make sense of all the big data.

Tell us about what you do at GenoSpace.

When you’re dealing with genomics and other biomedical data, there are a variety of different users and reasons for their use. So you could have an institution that has users engaged in research, clinical development, lab medicine and clinical care. They have different software application needs that cut across the same or similar data sets. One of the things we try to do is develop the tools, the interfaces and the experience that will enable all of those different people to get the most from the data.

Could you go over your major offerings?  

We have three primary categories of offerings: analysis and interpretation of a single assay result together with phenotypic and other clinical data, interactive analysis of data from many individuals as a group, such as from a large observational study (where we really excel is when a customer has integrated demographic, clinical, genomic, treatment, outcomes and other data) and enabling patients to directly report and interact with their data. We’ve created software applications and web-based sites for patients to upload their data, track their results and better understand their condition. Although we have a core competency in genomic data, we do not only deal with genomic data.  Research and clinical care rarely rely solely on a single data type.

Now that Obama has announced the Precision Medicine Initiative expanding genomic study, do you also expect your work to expand?

We think it’s a fascinating announcement and those are the types of initiatives we support. One of the interesting things is that we have customers right now solving many of the problems that the initiative will face. For example, we have been working with Inova, a healthcare system based in Northern Virginia that serves more than two million people per year in the metro DC area. They have been collecting a rich set of whole-genome sequencing data together with structured clinical data on thousands of people. Their data management and analysis needs map directly to those of precision medicine initiatives like the one announced by the White House.

I’d imagine that you’d have greater demand on the private side.  

We have spent most of our time there. Our first clinical lab customer, PathGroup, is delivering industry-leading molecular profiling across a wide geographic footprint, including to some big cities in their coverage area and also smaller cities and towns.  Our ability to help them bring academic-quality medicine to community oncology is a huge impact. Roughly 85% of oncology patients are treated in a community setting. If you’re only deploying in major cities with academic medical centers, you’re missing out.

What are your next plans? Any new projects or goals?

We are  looking to expand to different customer use cases. That can be in terms of the therapeutic indication, such as rare diseases, neurologic or cardiac disease. But it can also be integrating different kinds of data. We have a lot of experience working with demographic, diagnostic, treatment and outcomes data together with genomic results, and there are more opportunities to expand.

Are you also working on using machine learning to do predictive analytics?

We think about that a little differently. There’s supervised analysis, the user asking questions and getting answers about the data, and there’s unsupervised analysis. For many of our customers, they’re not looking for a black box. Our goal is not to replace molecular pathologists, but to work hand in hand with them to make sure their work is better, more operationally efficient and more sustainable, particularly if it’s a commercial entity.

That last piece is underappreciated by a lot of folks. We do a lot of work in genomics and in precision medicine and there’s a lot of science and advanced technology. All that work is lost in most settings if you don’t deliver it properly. You have to understand the science and the innovation, but also how to get it in the hands of people who can impact patients. That’s a big part of what we do.

Any final thoughts?

One of the fun things about being here is we have folks with a lot of different capabilities—in software engineering, interactive design, data science, etc. For a lot of the interesting problems that people are trying to solve in medicine, it takes that interdisciplinary team approach as opposed to a whole bunch of people with the same type of experience.

To learn more about GenoSpace, visit their website at genospace.com or follow them on Twitter at @GENOSPACE.

This article was originally published on MedTech Boston.

Cool Startup: twoXAR

Andrew Radin x 2
Andrew M. Radin (left) with friend and twoXAR business parter Andrew A. Radin.


It’s not every day that you meet someone with the same name as you. And it’s even less likely this person will have similar interests and be someone with whom you might want to start a business.

But that’s exactly the story of the two Andrew Radins, founders of twoXAR.

Chief Business Officer Andrew M. Radin met his co-founder and Chief Executive officer Andrew A. Radin battling over a domain name–you guessed it–andrewradin.com.  About six or seven years ago, the former asked the latter, who owned the domain, if he could buy it from him and was told (in not so many words) to get lost.

Somehow, this exchange sparked a friendship, first on Facebook, then through commonalities such as travel to China, working in science and tech and their independent, entrepreneurial pursuits.  A little over a year ago, as Andrew A. Radin completed work on a computational method to enhance drug and treatment discovery, he naturally thought of joining forces with his namesake and friend, Andrew M. Radin.

For Andrew M. who was just completing his MBA from MIT Sloan, the timing was right and the discovery compelling enough to turn down other appealing job offers and join Andrew A. in forming the aptly named twoXAR (pronounced TWO-czar). Based in Silicon Valley, the company predicts efficacy of drug candidates by applying statistical algorithms to various data sets.We caught up with Andrew M. Radin recently to hear about their exciting new venture and their progress.

Tell us about what you do at twoXAR.

We take large diverse, independent data sets including biological, chemical, clinical etc.–some subsets include gene expression assays, RNA-seq, protein binding profiles, chemical structure, drug libraries (tens  of thousands of drugs), whatever we can get our hands on–and use statistical algorithms to predict efficacy of drug candidates in a human across therapeutic areas. The raw output from our technology (DUMA Drug Discovery Platform) is the probability of a given drug to treat a given disease. It all takes only a matter of minutes.

Where do you get your data sets?  Are they from clinical trials?

Some of our data comes from clinical trials, but we pride ourselves on using data sets that are largely independent from each other and come from a variety of sources along the biomedical R&D chain–as early as basic research and as late as clinical data from drugs that have been on the market for 30 years.  All of these data sets are extremely noisy, but we specialize in identifying signal in this noise then seeking overlapping evidence from radically different data sets to strengthen that signal.

These data come from proprietary and public sources. The more data we have, the better results DUMA delivers.

Could you give an example of how you could use this tool in pharmacologic research?

Our technology allows us to better characterize the attributes of a disease beyond just gene expression. We can examine how a drug might be related to a myriad of informational evidence streams allowing a researcher to build more confidence on a prediction for drug efficacy.

Let’s take Parkinson’s Disease as an example. Existing treatments focus on managing the symptoms. The real societal win would be to stop, and possibly reverse, the progression of the disease altogether. This is what we are focusing on.

In Parkinson’s disease, we’ve acquired gene expression data on over 200 Parkinson’s patients sourced from the NIH and examined over 25,000 drug candidates and have found a handful of promising candidates across a variety of mechanisms of action.

So you can “test out” a drug before actually running a clinical trial?

That’s the idea. Using proprietary data mining techniques coupled with machine learning, we’ve developed DUMA, an in silico drug discovery platform that takes a drug library and predicts the probability of each of those drugs to treat the disease in question in a human body. We can plug in different drug libraries (small molecules, biologics, etc.) and different disease data sets as desired.

At this stage we are taking our in silico predictions to in vivo preclinical studies before moving to the clinic. Over time we aim to demonstrate that computational models can be more predictive of efficacy in humans than animal models are.

It seems, intuitively, that this would be really valuable, but I would imagine that your clients would want to see proof that this model works.  How do you prove that you have something worthwhile here?

Validation is critical and we are working on a number of programs to demonstrate the effectiveness of our platform. First, we are internally validating the model by putting known treatments for the disease into DUMA, but blinding the system to their current use. If in the results the known treatments are concentrated at the top of our list we know it’s working. Second, we take the drug candidates near the top of the list that are not yet known treatments and conduct preclinical studies with clear endpoints to demonstrate efficacy in the physical world. We are currently conducting studies with labs who have experience with these animal models to publish methods for peer-reviewed journals.

You have a really advanced tool to come up with potentially great treatments, but what’s to say that’s better than what’s going on out there now?  How do you prove it’s better or faster? 

If you look at drug industry trends, the top drug companies have moved out of R&D and become marketing houses–shifting the R&D risk to startups and small and medium drug companies. Drug prospecting is recognized to be extremely risky and established methods have produced exciting results in the past but have, over time, become less effective in striking the motherlode. Meanwhile, the drug industry suffers from the same big data woes as many industries–they can produce and collect petabytes and petabytes of data, but that goldmine is near-worthless if you don’t have the tools to interpret it and extract the gold. Advances in data science enable twoXAR to analyze, interpret, and produce actionable results with this data orders of magnitude faster than the industry has in the past.

It seems that this could be scaled up to have many different applications.  How do you see twoXAR transforming the industry? 

In regards to scale, not only can computational platforms look at more data faster than humans without bias, much smaller teams can accomplish more. At twoXAR, we have a handful of people in a garage and we can essentially do the work of many wet lab teams spanning multiple disease states. Investors, researchers, and patient advocacy groups are very interested in what we are doing because they see the disruptive potential of our technology and how it will augment the discovery of new life-saving treatments for our families and will completely recast the drug R&D space. One of the things I learned at MIT from professors Brynjolfsson and Little is that the increasingly exponential growth of technological progress often takes us by surprise. I predict that tectonic shifts in the drug industry will be coming much quicker than many folks expect.

To learn more about twoXAR, visit their website and blog.

This article was originally published on MedTech Boston.

Richard Parker on Global Payment Models & His Big Career Transition

richparker

(Please note:  This article has been re-published from MedTechBoston.com.)

Richard Parker, former Chief Medical Officer at Beth Israel Deaconess Care Organization (BIDCO), is a man of many talents. In addition to working as a physician, medical director and board member at BIDCO, he has also worked as a political consultant.

Now, after working for the Beth Israel Deaconess Care Organization for more than 15 years, Parker is off on a new adventure – one he calls his most exciting yet: starting his own healthcare consulting company, Parker Healthcare Innovations. we recently sat down with him to hear about this career shift.

Q: Tell us about your work at Beth Israel Deaconess.

In 2000, I was asked to be the medical director for the physician organization and I agreed to do it if I could still see patients, so I was medical director 50 percent of the time and seeing patients 50 percent of the time. That was the beginning of a lot of learning about the business of medicine, pay for performance, contracts, how doctors are motivated, information technology, and EMR.

In 2012, we had the opportunity to apply for the Pioneer ACO. In the greater Boston area, there are 5 organizations that are Pioneer ACOs: BIDMC, Mount Auburn, Partners Healthcare, Steward, and Atrius Health. That was a very fast learning curve because previously we were just dealing with the commercial population, which was up to the age of 65; now, we had to add all patients over the age of 65 who were in this Pioneer ACO. It was a different game.

Older patients are not the same as younger patients. There is more illness, more chronic disease, more hospital admission, and so now, instead of thinking about patients one at a time (which is how we learned to care for patients in medical school), we had to think of populations of patients – about systems and public health. I had to think: What can we do to make our systems better so we are improving the quality of care for patients in tangible ways and decrease costs? And this is the irony and the conundrum: it is actually possible to increase quality and decrease cost at the same time.

That allows for the transition from fee for service (FFS) to global payments. In the FFS model, patients come in, we treat them, and we bill them; that compels more treatment, more admissions, more referrals. In the global payment world, we turn that 180 degrees, we say, ‘Okay, doctors – maybe hospitals – you have a budget. If you come in under budget, we’ll share the surplus with you. If you come in over budget, you’re going to write us a check.’ That is an extremely different financial model. So at Beth Israel, I was trying to figure out how to build the systems and then how to translate this message to providers.

Q: What kind of results have you had with the Pioneer ACO?

We’ve seen excellent results. In fact, the BIDCO Pioneer ACO was the leader in the Boston Market and we’re the third most financially successful Pioneer ACO in the country. We’ve seen a lot of success. By the second year, we saw results in terms of quality, cost and patient satisfaction.

Q: So, the big question: What motivated you to make the switch from that work to starting your own company?

Part of my motivation was waking up one day and saying, “I’ve been in the same place for 30 years.” I started as an intern at Beth Israel Deaconess and I’m now going to be 59 years old. I’m fortunate to be healthy and have a great family and if I wanted to do something different, this seemed like the right time to do it. With the success we have had at BIDCO, this would be a great time to use it as a launching pad to do something different.

Q: What is your vision for Parker Healthcare Innovations? What would you like to achieve?

The first part is assisting doctors, hospitals, and to a lesser extent, health plans, that are trying to make the transition from fee for service medicine to a global payment system. Some of the things I talked about earlier, the challenges, these are things I now know a lot about, through working with Beth Israel Deaconess for 30 years. The challenges exist in the areas of governance, information technology and care management. Though people often think about this as a financial enterprise, really this is an opportunity to improve systems of care and the quality of care.

For example, I started a nurse practitioner home visit program. The sickest now get a nurse practitioner visiting their homes monthly. Now, with the nurse practitioner making a home visit, we’re not seeing them in the hospital as much. Patients are healthier, happier, families are happier. This is a big win. This is a real obvious example of a systems approach to disease management.

There are certain diseases that we need to focus on in order to be successful. In the Medicare population, there are six: heart failure, diabetes, emphysema, chronic kidney disease, behavioral medicine, and palliative or end of life care. I anticipate helping groups of doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies in how to move in this direction because I know how to do it. Every system is different. There’s a lot to figure out and it’s not for the faint of heart to make that transition.

The other thing I’m doing in my company is giving a presentation on the topic of stress. My goal is to give this presentation to companies and to colleges because I feel that chronic stress has become a really enormous problem and I saw this when I was practicing medicine.

Q: What other trends do you see in the future? What else should the healthcare world be preparing for?

One colossal trend will be the demand for more value for money. There will be continued pressure on all of us to stop wasting so much. Healthcare costs are a big drain on the economy and businesses, whether you’re self-employed or you work for a big corporation, everyone is paying this colossal cost. The issue of cost in healthcare hasn’t been adequately addressed; it hasn’t been touched.

On a brighter note, I’m hoping that we’ll see more intelligent self-care, maybe leveraging technology. Technology is fabulous but only if used in a useful way. Hopefully with all this technology we can help people with self-care, around chronic illnesses, like weight management, stress, blood pressure control, diabetes. Hopefully we’ll see some really good things in that space.

I’d also like to see more care at home, less in the hospital setting. I consult to a home IV infusion company, called Soleo Health, and I think doing treatments for patients in the home is better, more comfortable and cost-saving.

A Peek Inside the Harvard Forum on Health Care Innovation

Prof. John Quelch discussing the Bloodbuy case study.

The Harvard Forum on Health Care Innovation, a joint collaboration between Harvard Business School and Harvard Medical School, was recently held in Cambridge, Mass, on April 15-16, 2015. This private, invitation-only event assembled an elite group that included HBS and HMS alumni and faculty, as well as other key opinion leaders in healthcare. Cara Sterling, Director of HBS’s Health Care Initiative, who organized the event, shared that the goal for the event was to provide an opportunity for “people from different sectors to come together and talk freely” in order to “spur innovation in healthcare.”

One key aspect of the event was the introduction of the finalists of the HBS-HMS Health Acceleration Challenge, a contest that was launched to seek innovative, early-stage healthcare ventures that have great potential for transforming healthcare.

Out of a total of 478 applicants, 18 were selected as semi-finalists; from those, four of the brightest were chosen as finalists to share a $150,000 Cox Prize. They’ve also had an HBS case study written about them, and each team presented and received feedback at this year’s Forum. The final winner will be decided in a year’s time, by identifying the startup venture that is most successful in disseminating and scaling their healthcare solution.

Look out for the great work of these four finalists in the coming year:

  • Bloodbuy is a startup that aims to improve the efficiency and price transparency of the blood supply market by matching blood centers and hospitals through an online, cloud-based platform. In a pilot program, this system was found to decrease hospital costs by 23% while also decreasing the risk of blood shortages and the waste of blood products.
  • The I-Pass Patient Handoff Program is a training curriculum developed by six clinicians to improve the exchange of patient information between providers that occurs at the change of a shift. A research study of this intervention, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that use of I-Pass led to an impressive 30% reduction in medical errors.
  • Medalogix is a predictive analytics company that has created a product to that can assist those in the post-acute care sector to better identify hospice-eligible patients. Through working with Medalogix, clients have been able to successfully increase transfers to hospice from home health care and decrease the number of live discharges from hospice.
  • Twine Health is a startup that has created a cloud-based, collaborative care platform of the same name that enables providers to partner with their patients through coaches to provide seamless care and support for the management of chronic disease. In a recent clinical trial, Twine more efficiently helped patients achieve blood pressure control, which resulted in cost-savings (versus the traditional model of care).

***

In addition to the Health Acceleration Challenge finalists, there was also an impressive line-up of healthcare experts that shared their thoughts throughout the two days in keynotes and panel discussions. Below are some of the highlights:

Value in Healthcare

Speaker Peter Orszag, Vice Chairman of Corporate and Investment Banking and Chairman of the Financial Strategy and Solutions Group at Citigroup, discussed three major structural forces that he feels will have a major affect on healthcare quality and spending, including the shift to value based payments, digitization of healthcare, and the increased role of the consumer in healthcare spending. He also discussed three big unknowns and their future impact on the heathcare cost curve, namely: future policy changes, increasing consolidation of the healthcare market, and emerging healthcare innovation.

A Blueprint for the Future

Mark Bertolini, Chairman and CEO of Aetna, gave a keynote speech entitled “A Blueprint for a 21st Century Health Care System” in which he highlighted five key measures that hold promise to improve healthcare:

  • System re-design that enables lower cost, higher quality care with increased access
  • Sophisticated health IT systems
  • Care optimization, especially to coordinate care for the 5 percent for whom most healthcare dollars are spent
  • Aligning economic incentives with healthcare goals
  • Increasing patient engagement.

Employers as Innovators

In an engaging panel discussion, moderator Bryan Roberts, Partner at Venrock, discussed the growing role of “employers as innovators” with expert panel members Ellen Exum, Director of Benefits/Global Design and Strategy at IBM; Adam Jackson, CEO and Cofounder of Doctor on Demand; Brian Marcotte, CEO and President of the National Business Group on Health; and Derek Newell, CEO of Jiff.

There was a robust discussion regarding the use of wearables and other tools as part of wellness programs to increase engagement and compliance, and to hopefully improve outcomes. One example was Adam Jackson’s Doctor on Demand which, for $40 per telehealth visit, has been found to decrease costs, decrease absenteeism, and increase productivity and morale.

Focus on Neurologic Disease

In a discussion with William Sahlman, Professor of Business Administration at HBS, Deborah Dunsire, MD, President and CEO of FORUM Pharmaceuticals shared her company’s mission of tackling neurological disease. Costs to society due to neurologic disease are great, she argued, not just in terms of direct costs, but also indirect costs – and there should be increased focus in developing treatments for these disorders. One significant challenge is the lack of mental health advocacy, which is an obstacle to obtaining funding for research.

The “Retail-ization” of Healthcare

Speaker Helena Foulkes, President of CVS/Pharmacy and Executive VP of CVS Health, shared the key factors that she feels are driving the “retail-ization” of healthcare:

  • Excessive spending on chronic disease
  • Increasing number of baby boomers on Medicare
  • Rising use of the internet to research health information online
  • Growing numbers of employers with high deductible plans.

She also shared the initiatives that CVS has begun to help tackle these problems, which include drug adherence programs, a focus on patients with the greatest needs, and integrating digital tools.

Dr. Watson Will See You Now

Speaker Mark Megerian, Senior Tech Staff Member at IBM Watson Solutions, shared the exciting (and for some, frightening) prospect of using machine learning and predictive analytics to make clinical recommendations via IBM’s Watson program.

Trained at Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK), Watson has been shown to be capable of making recommendations similar to MSK oncologists, with 97 percent accuracy, for breast, colon, rectal, and lung cancers. They are now scaling to include other types of cancers and also to involve other organizations.

***

Closing remarks were given by Dr. Jeffrey Flier, Dean of HMS, who shared that he feels healthcare delivery innovation has been sorely lacking, and that HMS and HBS are now deeply committed to medicine and entrepreneurship. Harvard hopes to lead healthcare innovation in the future. From the look of this year’s very promising Health Acceleration Challenge finalists, it seems his wish is likely to come true.

This article was originally published on MedTechBoston.com.

What’s Hot in Boston Biotech

Xconomy

Popular business and technology news site Xconomy held its eighth annual life sciences forum on April 8, 2015 at the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Mass. This year’s theme was “What’s Hot in Boston Biotech” and drew a who’s who of industry leaders, scientists, and entrepreneurs. The sold-out event packed the 250-seat auditorium of the Broad Institute and drew a dynamic crowd from all segments of the life sciences industry.

So, the burning question… what is hot in Boston biotech?

New Treatments for Neurodegenerative Diseases

Adam Koppel, Senior VP and Chief Strategy Officer at Biogen, discussed exciting new treatments that are in the pipeline for some of the most challenging neurodegenerative disorders. Highly anticipated medications include aducanumab for Alzheimer’s disease, anti-LINGO for multiple sclerosis, and ISIS-SMN for spinal muscular atrophy. Aducanumab has gotten a lot of attention in the news recently as a result of the positive results of a clinical trial showing a dose and time-dependent reduction in amyloid plaque.

Another company working on therapies for Alzheimer’s (and other neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s and ALS) is Yumanity. Tony Coles, CEO, and Susan Lindquist, Scientific Founder, discussed Yumanity’s use of yeast as a neuronal model that could tackle the protein folding problems at the root of many neurodegenerative diseases.

Exciting Frontiers in Synthetic Biology

James Collins, Professor of Medical Engineering and Science at MIT, and Amir Nashat, Managing Partner at Polaris Partners, discussed new opportunities in synthetic biology. Notable innovations include the development of therapeutics and diagnostics that can be affordably embedded in paper, cloth, or made into pellet form, as well as the synthetic engineering of microbes to fight diseases. The speakers also discussed the importance of ethical considerations and the need for safeguards as this area of science advances.

Immuno-Based Cancer Therapies

Chuck Wilson, CEO and President of Unum Therapeutics, and Ben Auspitz, Partner at Fidelity Biosciences, discussed a bold new avenue for cancer treatment that involves re-engineering a patient’s own T-cells with antibodies that respond specifically to their cancers. Currently, the therapy has been successfully used in the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia, but it holds great potential in treating other cancers – and also for possibly developing a cancer vaccine.

Harnessing the Microbiome 

Another exciting area of research in biotech is in the development of therapies that aim to modulate the microbiome to treat disease. Bernat Olle, Principal of PureTech Ventures, and Marian Nakada, VP of Venture Investments at JNJ Innovation, spoke about a joint venture – Vedanta Biosciences – focusing on microbiome treatments for autoimmune and inflammatory diseases.

The Future of Genetic Therapy

In a fantastic panel on the potential and pitfalls of gene therapy, led by moderator Michelle Dipp, Co-founder and CEO of Ovascience, panel members discussed the fact that gene therapy is still in its nascency. Many underestimate the time that it will take to develop effective therapies. Panel members included: Steven Paul, President and CEO of Voyager Therapeutics; Olivier Danos, SVP of Gene Therapy at Biogen; and Peter Kolchinsky, Managing Member and Portfolio Manager at RA Capital Management. Other challenges are in developing better gene vectors and anticipating how the broad adoption of genetic carrier testing in the future may affect the development of gene therapies.

The Potential of Precision Medicine

Samantha Singer, COO of the Broad Institute, moderated an interesting panel on precision medicine, with speakers David Altschuler, Executive VP of Global Research and CSO of Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and Alexis Borisy, Chairman of Foundation Medicine and Partner at Third Rock Ventures. Altschuler said that the advantage of precision medicine is that it will enable companies to target therapies more specifically and to “fail less often.” Efficiency, pace, and the success of drug development are likely to be enhanced as a result of better knowledge of the genetic basis of disease.

Scalability Challenges

Noubar Afeyan, Managing Partner and CEO of Flagship Venture, gave an entertaining talk about the challenges and opportunities of the biotech industry in Boston and Cambridge. He shared that he felt this was an unprecedented environment for biotech, in large part due to the co-existence and collaboration of large biotechs and pharmas along with smaller, entrepreneurial companies that engaged in more radical innovation.

He went on to discuss that he felt that scalability was the biggest challenge for Boston biotechs, in terms of resources, people, the process, and other externalities (such as space, the regulatory environment, and the development of partnerships). This is where much of the focus should be in the industry in order to encourage further growth.

This story was originally published at MedTechBoston.com.

Key Healthcare Takeaways from HxRefactored

amyhxr

Health Experience Refactored (HxRefactored), a conference co-hosted by health innovation event planner Health 2.0 and design agency Mad*Pow, recently met at the Westin Boston Waterfront on April 1 and 2, 2015. There was an impressive turnout of professionals from diverse industries, all gathering to discuss how to improve healthcare through better patient-centered design. The two-day event was jam-packed with keynotes from influential speakers, panel discussions, exhibits, and other presentations.

There was much to learn for anyone working at the intersection of technology, design, and medicine. Below are some of the key takeaways for healthcare professionals:

Harnessing “Small Data”

There’s a lot of buzz about collecting “big data” in healthcare right now, but Deborah Estrin, Professor of Computer Science at Cornell Tech, founder of Healthier Life Hub, and co-founder of Open mHealth, spoke about the need to build an ecosystem with small data, too – data that patients generate everyday. Small data includes passively recorded activity from wearables, data from mobile apps, digital traces from purchases and other online activities, and data from sensors. Estrin co-founded Open mHealth with the goal of creating free and open API’s where this small data can be collected, accessed and harnessed to better inform clinical care.

Changing Health IT

Dr. John Halamka, CIO at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, outlined the big trends in health IT that we can expect in the coming year. These include work on the Federal Interoperability Roadmap, Meaningful Use Stage 3 Notice of Proposed Rule Making (which aims to simplify and enhance interoperability of the CMS incentive program), adopting a risk-based approach for regulating mobile medical apps, increasing awareness and focus on security and privacy concerns, and a return to private sector innovation, with the Argonaut Project being a prime example of collaboration among private sector EHR companies to create a universal format for data collection to enable more transparent information sharing.

Improving Healthcare with Telehealth

Dr. Geoff Williams from the University of Rochester’s Center for Community Health gave an interesting talk about the Self Determination Theory model of health behavior change. Through his research, he has found that increasing contact time with providers through virtual visits can lead to increased success in achieving desired behavioral changes and health outcomes. Virtual programs were found to be more successful than traditional approaches to treat certain health conditions.

Shifting to Innovative Care Models

During one of the panel sessions, Dr. Joseph Kvedar, Vice President of Connected Health, Partners Healthcare, discussed how the shift to value-based payments is necessitating the rise of innovative models of care that focus more on patient engagement, prevention and wellness promotion.

There were a number of interesting speakers from organizations working in this space who gave great examples of success in improving outcomes and providing cost- savings. The speakers included David Chao, Director, Industry Solutions at MuleSoft; Stanley Crane, Chief Innovation Officer at Allscripts; Andrea Ippolito, Presidential Innovation Fellow at the VA; Dr. John Moore, CEO of Twine Health; and Dr. Yuri Quintana, Global Health Informatics at Harvard Medical School.

Using Physician Databases & Referral Tools

Another interesting panel discussion focused on the struggle to efficiently find eligible physicians, make appropriate referrals and schedule physician appointments. There were a number of excellent companies represented during this panel, most of whom are building physician databases and working to correct this problem for various stakeholders, including patients, providers, and organizations. Most interesting is that in addition to providing these services, some of these companies can also harness their large databases for demographic studies of physicians. Speakers included Lisa Maki, CEO of PokitDok; Nate Gross, Co-Founder of Doximity; Ashish Patel, Co-Founder of Careset and DocGraph; Russell Tevis, Senior Director from the Advisory Board Company; and Julie Yoo, Co-founder and Chief Product Officer of Kyruus.

Keeping a Patient-Centered Focus

Ted Talk speaker Julian Treasure gave an inspiring final keynote that fittingly reminded the audience to keep the focus on the patient. He gave helpful advice on how healthcare leaders can be more mindful of the patient’s experience, particularly through the use of sound. He also discussed how to be an active listener, and also how to be more mindful when speaking.

This article was originally published on MedTechBoston.

10 Genius Ideas to Improve Healthcare

Photo courtesy Anna Shaynurova
Photo courtesy Anna Shaynurova

10 Genius Ideas to Improve Healthcare from MIT Sloan’s Bioinnovations Conference

The MIT Sloan School of Management held its 11th annual Bioinnovations Conference at the Boston Marriott Cambridge Hotel on September 20th, featuring influential speakers from the healthcare, life sciences, research, and regulatory sectors. This year’s theme was “Value in Healthcare” and brought an impressive turnout of over 350 attendees.

“Our goal for the conference was to bring together industry leaders across business, science and medicine to discuss some of the most pressing issues in healthcare,” said conference organizer Anita Kalathil. “MIT and Sloan are passionate about how to improve healthcare, whether at the molecular or systems level, and we know that any solutions are going to have to be cross functional. Our goal was to make the MIT Sloan Bioinnovations conference the connecting point for these different groups.”

There were many great takeaways from this conference, but here are 10 of the most noteworthy:

1. Delivering true value in healthcare.

Neel Shah, founder and executive of Costs of Care, was the conference’s opening speaker. “There’s a misperception that considering cost is not aligned with patient interests,” he said. Cost consideration is becoming ever more important in healthcare, as policymakers demand greater accountability and patients demand greater transparency in pricing.

2. Refocusing the future of research & development.

Mark Fishman, President of Novartis Institutes of Biomedical Research, shared in his opening keynote that aging, cancer, brain disease and genetic therapies hold the greatest promise for future research. He also shared his unique approach for R&D, which is to focus less on cost-benefit and more on areas with the greatest patient needs and solid scientific knowledge.

3. Putting Big Data to good use.

There was a lively discussion during the Big Data, Policy, and Personalized Medicine panel, highlighting the need for better ways of collecting, analyzing and interpreting the huge amounts of data that are being generated from various sources, including medical records, diagnostics, genomics, and sensory data from patient devices. The panel members represented a number of impressive companies (TwoXAR, Privacy Analytics and Genospace) that are attempting to do just that.

4. Researching therapies (and prevention).

In his keynote address, Gary Kelloff, Special Advisor to the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Health, shared that the present approach in cancer research involves discovering and developing targeted therapies to biomarkers of cancer. While acknowledging the importance this research, Dr. Kelloff also urged participants to invest in researching the prevention of disease.

5. Improving health IT.

In his keynote, John Halamka, CIO at Beth Israel Deaconess, discussed the ongoing challenges in health information technology that need to be addressed: lack of interoperability, providing transparency while also ensuring privacy, harnessing HIT and Big Data to improve quality of care, and facing the ongoing threat of accelerating security incidents.

6. Considering a team approach.

During a panel about medical device development, Ramesh Raskar, Associate Professor at MIT Media Lab & Head of Camera Culture Research Group, shared that he felt the sciences needed to move away from independent research (which can be slow to produce innovations) and toward a culture that allows individuals to work more collaboratively in teams (which can be faster). He also shared a memorable quote: “The innovator may or may not be an entrepreneur,” which again highlighted the advantage of a diverse team approach.

7. Incorporating patient-centered design.

Kristian Olson, Medical Director at the Consortium for Affordable Medical Technology, recommended that “patients be in the room” when designing medical innovations. And Elizabeth Johansen, Director of Product Design and Implementation at Diagnostics for All, shared her techniques for creating user-friendly devices. Particularly helpful was her advice to observe how patients interact with their devices in their own surroundings.

8. Overhauling healthcare delivery.

According to Mikki Nasch, co-founder of The Activity Exchange, “Your zip code is still a better predictor of your health than your genetic code.” Social and environmental factors are huge determinants of health, and the delivery of healthcare in old models doesn’t address this issue. Healthcare needs urgently to transition away from traditional paradigms and into newer models of care, such as ACOs, that better address these social factors.

9. Finding collaboration between payers and pharma.

There was a lively debate during one of the panels about specialty drug pricing. Panel members suggested that payers and pharma need to come together at a systems level to help advance development of treatments and cures. Dr. Winton from Biogen Idec Market Access suggested new payer-pharma models and shared risk plans.

10. Driving innovation with patients at the wheel.

The final keynote of the day was given by Jamie Heywood, Co-Founder and Chairman of PatientsLikeMe, an online platform that allows patients to share information about their medical conditions and treatments and connect with others with similar conditions. Not only does this novel website help patients, but the open platform also allows healthcare and industry professionals to better understand patients’ experiences and conditions and may help to accelerate the development of new treatments. Conference attendee Dimple Mirchandani was impressed with Heywood’s emphasis on continuous learning to better understand diseases and their treatments, and by his inspiring vision for caregivers and patients to use “data for good.”

This article was originally posted on MedTech Boston.