Is Tech Turbocharging Life Sciences?

Life sciences, technology and engineering are converging to create some incredible solutions to health challenges.??

The industry is much broader today, and I think a lot of that is down to technology. Globally, the life sciences landscape is rapidly changing and expanding due to the advancements of emerging technology like artificial intelligence and big data.

It’s a constantly evolving industry that needs to adapt quickly, and technology can be a great leveller, breaking old monopolies held by big pharmaceuticals and increasing speed to market, and we’ve seen some of that happen already with vaccine development.

The real challenge is how quickly, safely and effectively technology and science can be brought together.

?

Life sciences can’t move fast and break things

Life sciences are much more heavily regulated than the tech sector, for good reason. You cannot start a life sciences company in your bedroom and scale it within a few months. Lives are often at stake.

Products are released very quickly in the technology world, with the full consequences usually unknown. Companies and regulators react slowly, once problems like misinformation and online harm are already well established. They hire compliance officers late in the day, and regulations are slowly built around the situation after the event.

In life science industries, that just isn’t feasible. You can't run too fast and release a drug without strong evidence and a solid regulatory environment. That’s one of the reasons why the technological cycle in life sciences will look very different to the traditional tech sector, where only money can be lost.

That doesn’t mean life sciences are reluctant to embrace technology. Many companies are using AI and data-driven approaches to speed up research and predict the success of drugs, though clearly the lab testing and human trials phases will always be fundamental to the process. However, engineering has the potential to significantly speed up the process from research to approval.??

Machine learning is an obvious tool that is transforming life sciences, but other technological advances will be crucial too. Cybersecurity for example will need to be cutting-edge and constantly improving, to protect user data and the integrity of research.

?

Tread carefully, but build capability quickly

I expect to see a bit more hesitation around the application of emerging technologies like AI in the life sciences industry, because scientists and technologists can often have different mindsets. There is not the same desire to ‘move fast and break things’, and researchers and scientists will rightly want to see robust empirical evidence that new technology works and can be trusted. In a recent survey of life science professionals, 70% of people said they had not yet implemented technology at scale, and 63% said they were worried about the potential for harm caused by poor quality of data.

I saw the same approach in the banking world, where the consequences of failure in embracing cloud technology were so concerning, that it took much longer to become mainstream.

I do think that life sciences companies that explore the potential impact of technology and prepare for its adoption, by getting key hires in place for example, will be seen as more attractive to investors.

Recruiting data scientists and AI engineers will be part of that transformation, and those hires will need to adapt to a very different regulatory environment than they are used to. There will be a need for retraining and reskilling in several areas of the business, and given the experience of other sectors, that may require some breaking down of perceived barriers.

In finance, there was once a perception in finance that you couldn’t hire an engineer, especially someone without a finance background who wouldn’t understand the nature of the business or the terminology. Businesses that were once finance-led are now technology-led. They are totally agnostic about the terminology, and more focused on the product. That is quite a pivot, and though life sciences should not necessarily be technology-led, there may be some similarities in the journey.

Life sciences challenges are all about people, and companies are people-led. However, use cases are being built and technology is starting to lead the conversation.

James Olsen quotes; ”Real world examples of this approach are now being evidenced and starting to make a significant impact; a good example is GSKs use of advanced data modelling to support its RSV development programme. This led to first mover advantage and the impact on its share price has been obvious”

Until now, the key roles within life sciences have been roles such as the head of regulatory affairs, consultants, and medical advisors. I sense that sometime soon, the head of artificial intelligence and data scientists will become just as vital.

We should also see two distinct verticals of expertise working more closely together – regulatory affairs and artificial intelligence working more closely than they might in other industries.

Integrating technology into such an extremely complex regulatory environment will take time, as Linklaters’ Georgina Kon explains well in this very good interview . But provided the right balance is struck between safety and innovation, the eventual use cases will be extraordinary.

?

Investment is growing, but the picture is mixed

Technological advancement doesn’t come cheap, and funding will be critical to adoption.??

The upside potential in life sciences is huge, but backers are fully aware that unlike tech companies that could scale in months, launching and safely scaling a life science business or product can take 5-10 years.

That’s one of the reasons that many smaller life science businesses have struggled to get funding in the last couple of years, though investment across every sector has been hit by the cost of interest rates and macro events.

VC and private equity portfolios have changed because of that, and many are still favouring a shorter time to exit. Those that are focused on life sciences are urging companies to embrace AI and data, and I wonder if there will be a place in the future for a life sciences business that is not technology-led, or where technology is playing a joint leading role in decision making.

I suppose because of my background in technology, I am incredibly excited by the prospect of technology and human scientific innovation combining to solve some of the biggest health challenges in our society.

The UK leads the world in many areas of life sciences and technology, and I am encouraged that innovation hubs and investment zones dedicated to life sciences in places like Cambridge, Newcastle and the new Liverpool City Region Life Sciences Investment Zone will play a huge part in that journey. That should help the sector attract the skills it needs to stay ahead in a race that is truly global.