Bridging Science, Politics, and Innovation: Unlocking Biotech Future in Europe

Where do you see the biggest potential to translate research into patient benefit?

I think we are currently in a really special time in medicine because we see rapid progress in many fields. In particular, for example, in cell and gene therapy. And at the same time, you see major innovations in methodology, like in artificial intelligence. And combining the new fields with the new methods makes up for a really exciting time.

What role do platforms like bio:cap play in Europe — and globally?

I think we have long-lasting interactions between startups and investors. And that Biocap brings into the field the entire political arena is of extreme importance both on the national and the international level. Because only with integration of politics you will find ways and means (0:37) to change the necessary environment for progress.

What are the biggest obstacles to scaling innovation in Europe?

I think that is one of the major really advantages of bio:cap because the necessary changes cannot be brought in by the people who do the science or who do the translation but in the translation environment. This has several factors, the most important of which is the money available to go into later phases of translation and integration into market structures. And this, as I said, can be only done by politics, and that's the unique feature of bio:cap.

How important are global partnerships across academia, industry, and investors?

I think the interfaces between various organizations which are really enabled by the bio:cap structure now are of most importance for further development. In particular, the interaction of academia and industry, which we try really to foster here at Charité will enable new structures and based on these new structures, also new and and really breathtaking results.

How can innovation, regulation, and clinical practice work better together?

That's a difficult question and it's based on individual structures in the individual institutions at Charité and again in connection with bio:cap. We try to reorganise the entire business of innovation, just taking out the hurdles which you just mentioned. And if we go into these new innovative structures and combine them with the new interfaces between Charité and industrial partners, we are convinced that we can overcome other problems which existed until now.

Which life sciences topics should be top priorities globally — and for bio:cap right now

I think that pretty much depends on the individual partners. For us at Charité, and we hope very much on the impact of bio:cap. It's the area of cell and gene therapy which is of are of most importance for innovative developments. On the other hand, we are in the midst of fields which are rather unconventional for academic medical centres, and one major example for us is the entire area of prevention. We are convinced that the future health system in Germany will rely much on preventive measures, and these measures are also put in place by the interaction of academic partners and industrial partners, and the platform of that is again, bio:cap.

What makes bio:cap unique in an international context — and why is Charité involved as a partner?

We think that aside from the traditional interaction of start-ups and people who pay for them, so the investors, the addition of politics is of paramount importance for the entire set up because the political arena is the one and only actor which can really change the conditions for the entire field. Therefore, it's of most importance to integrate them. And that was, for Charité, one of the most important reasons to engage ourselves heavily in the bio:cap.