Chats

Creaducate interview with Dymium

“It’s your job to figure out if it’s a problem you’re solving, or if it’s a problem you’re making up” 

Shyam Srinivasan completed his undergraduate studies in medical engineering at VIT University in India and a master’s degree in biomedical computing at the Technical University of Munich. He made the jump from research to  entrepreneurship when he joined forces with two colleagues to create Dymium (dymium.de), a start-up aiming to market a new-generation device to treat kidney stone disease. So far, they have attracted more than 850,000 EUR in funding through public grants and private foundations. 

Creaducate Consulting (www.creaducate.eu), a Silver Partner of Innovation Forum 2022, recently sat down with Mr. Srinivasan to ask him what he has learned about the importance of good communication on his entrepreneurial journey.

Creaducate: Has anything changed about how you communicate your product from when you first began your start-up to now?

Srinivasan: We change our communication every other month, and it depends on what level we’re at, and how our development goes. It also depends on what we learn from month to month. We have different presentations or pitches for investors, for potential partners, and so on. Knowing our audience is our first principle for how we communicate outside. 

When we began the company, we were four people – all students – and the communication was mostly about the problem and making sure the audience understood the problem, especially because the audience was mixed: there were some urologists, some surgeons, other types of clinicians, as well as people from management and administration. Our communication was about making all of them understand the entire process and how our concept works.

As we developed, as the proof of principle became a proof of concept and then a prototype, we started to get more information about what we were developing. At the same time, we also understood what our market wanted and what our end-users needed. This information brought us forward in helping us explain what we were up to. So, if you compare our communication now with our communication three years ago, they both talk about the same problem and the same solution, but how we are getting there has changed. As we developed, we realized that products have to be priced a certain way, made a certain way, and tested a certain way, for them to reach the market. And that has changed the way we communicate about the product. In the beginning, we were dreamers, and since then we became realists.

Creaducate: Have you had to change your communication in response to changes in your landscape of competitors?

Srinivasan: Just as we have progressed, our competitors have as well. The good news is, we know more about our competitors with time. The bad news is, they’re ahead of the curve: our two main competitors are at least three years ahead of us in terms of development. That led us to sharpen and focus our communication to investors in order to highlight the advantages that our  product offers over theirs.

Creaducate: You made the transition from academia to industry, and in particular, to the world of start-ups. Has that led you to change the way you communicate? 

Srinivasan: Things change when you move from research to entrepreneurship because you need to draw a fine line between presenting and selling. To investors, you sell them your vision, your team, and your concept – in that order. With academia and with scientists, we sell with our results, then with our team, and then with our financial backing, including any potential conflicts of interest over who’s actually supporting the project. Scientists are concerned about who’s supporting the project, mainly to understand any potential biases in data reporting.

Investors care about your financial backing as well, but primarily for a different reason: they want to know who else has become convinced of your vision. Investors want to know if you have a good team, a good market, and a good basis for the concept you’re developing. Is the technology proven, tested, and technologically safe? Has the concept been de-risked, financially and technically? These are important to anyone who might fund your work, including public agencies and foundations. 

As scientists, we tend to undersell. We seldom think about expressing what our vision is. It’s important to convey what you want the product to achieve.

Creaducate: We have focused so far on external communication. What have you learned about internal comunication, within your company?

Srinivasan: Investors invest in teams, not in ideas. Teams are the “no. 1” reason why start-ups succeed or fail. If members of a team have different visions, if founders don’t meet to openly discuss their expectations – are they looking for a quick exit in a couple of years, are they looking to develop an SME in 10 years? – and if the team doesn’t have an IP strategy they agree on, then they can’t lead the company in the same direction.

Creaducate: What would be your favorite advice for people who, like you, want to make the shift from academia to a start-up?

Srinivasan: People get excited when they discover something; I think that’s true for any scientist. It’s a process of self-discovery, yet the truth in this world is that it’s probably been done before (laughs), and people forget to do their basic patent and literature research after they’ve found something. That is a reflection of their ability to analyze what’s on the market and to challenge their own idea. That’s the first thing about external communication: it’s not about whether you’re open or closed with your idea, it’s about whether you’ve done your homework to know is it patentable or is there a market behind it? It’s your job to figure out if it’s a problem you’re solving, or is it a problem you’re making up for a solution that you have. Be very objective about it. Then start speaking to people who have experience with that, who know what it’s like to have done something, who know the field… to see what they think about it.

The first lesson of communication about your product is to be able to be objective about it: to be able to say it is *^*! when it is. That is true for external as well as internal communication: co-founders need to be able to say to one another that the idea is not that great.

We engineers and technical people have a bad tendency to start thinking about solutions before defining the problem. We really need to stop doing that (laughs).

It’s quite useful to have a member of your team with a business background, because it changes the communication within the team. If you’re two scientists who think you can start a company and you think your idea is great, put that to the test by talking to someone with a business background. That person will probably ask you questions you would never ask yourselves. They ask about costs and achievability. They ask you to dumb down the idea to its simplest version, which most scientists fail to do. The people who want to fund you do not necessarily have the background to understand what you do.

Pitching Dymium

Kidney stones are notorious: they are crystals that tend to regrow if left behind in the kidney, and doctors are unable to remove all of them, so patients have to come back for future surgeries.  Currently doctors go into the kidney using an endoscope that’s going through the urethra and into the kidney, then they break the big stones into small stones, and catch each one with a basket and remove them individually. Imagine removing thousands and thousands of pieces of stones individually – it’s virtually impossible. We want to change the way the procedure is done: we want the stones to come to us. The best things in the world that enable you to do that are magnets. We found a way to magnetize the kidney stones, and we found a way to introduce a magnet into the kidney, so that we can pull all of them out in a few swift flows.

I took an entire three years’ worth of research and development and dumbed it down into five sentences. It conveys the message: what is the problem, the solution, and the product. That is what you should be able to do.

Shyam Srinivasan, Co-founder, Dymium

Interview with Neobe Therapeutics

Narges Sheikhansari: Hello and thank you both for being here today. I’ll start with my first question, please tell us about your team. What are your backgrounds and your founding story? 

Pedro Correa de Sampaio [CEO, Neobe Therapeutics]: So, I’ve been working in the tumour microenvironment area for many years, always as an academic. Considering that one of the defining features of cancer is how genetically unstable it is, it made complete sense to me to better understand the real state that surrounds cancer cells. So it’s something that I’ve been interested in for a while, and I have studied it a lot, particularly in my post-doc, looking at how different components of this environment interact with each other; specifically how they can cause barriers to the infiltration of immune cells into particular types of tumour. However, I wanted to see a real world application of my work, so I took some of the ideas that I had before and created a new company.

So, I just decided to take the challenge and I started looking at the entire field of the microenvironment, and tried to come up with new ideas of disrupting it in a way that can facilitate therapeutic efficacy that has real impact on patients. That’s how I slowly started coming up with the idea of using bacteria, at which point it became clear that I know nothing about bacteria. I needed to find someone who knew about bacteria to help me put that idea together. And that’s where I met Annelise Soulier and she joined me on the project.

Annelise Soulier [CSO]: Pedro contacted me last December, and I thought it was a great opportunity. As I am a microbiologist by training, I found the idea very interesting.

Narges: That is wonderful, and what was the missing link in the industry or amazing technology development that motivated you to create your start-up?

Pedro: I felt that there was a clear need, particularly in the space of immuno-oncology, to address microenvironmental blocks to immune infiltration. Currently, 15-20% of patients at best are responsive to treatment, and the main constraint that prevents more patients from responding is the existence of the immunosuppressive barriers in the tumour microenvironment.

So, when I came across this opportunity and had the funding to put these ideas into a company, I basically jumped on it.

So, we kind of started with the problem. What have people done before? Why has it not worked? What can we do that is different? And we continued from there.

Narges: Very interesting. What have been the challenges to your success? What are the unexpected lessons you’ve had to learn?

Pedro: One of the first ones was, putting a lab together. We started with an idea and we put together our business plan. We compiled the experimental strategy and then we jumped straight in. We needed to start developing that data. So, putting the lab together and generating the data that we needed to create some intellectual property that we could use to push the company forward have been two of the main challenges.

Annelise: The development of the design experiments was one of the main parts of my job when I joined Pedro. And so, one of the first things I did was to start engineering the different types of bacteria that we selected, which was quite challenging. It’s still in development, and we haven’t patented them yet.

Narges: Interesting. And what have been the key pieces of support that have helped you grow?

Pedro: I think having the right team is one of the biggest points. I think that the two of us were committed enough to commit to this project full time and wanted to push it through.

It means that we believe in what we’re doing, and that’s one of the main things driving us forward.

Annelise: I agree, we are a great team. We really believe in this new idea, and we really want to move things forward.

Narges: That’s great to hear. What are your next steps? Where do you see your startup in 5 years?

Pedro: The way I see the company evolving is in establishing ourselves as the main player of a new niche of using bacterial therapeutics to remodel the tumour microenvironment. I feel like this is going to be a hugely growing market in cancer therapeutics. The biotechnology industry and the pharma industry are finally coming to terms with how important it’s going to be to target the microenvironment. And I think by using bacteria, we’re doing it in a different way from everyone else and in a way that has the potential to be a lot more efficient than what other people have been able to accomplish. If we manage to prove that our approach works, then we want to diversify into starting to develop a lot of different bacterial components that target different areas of the tumour microenvironment.

Annelise: I really believe that there is no one drug or one type of bacteria that will be able to target all the different types of tumour. There is a diversity of tumours and there is a diversity of bacteria. So, the game will be to expand, the library of bacteria.

Narges: That is an impressive vision to have. And my last question. Do you have any advice for other scientist entrepreneurs looking to start up their own innovation?

Pedro: That’s a great question. I think coming from academia, I’d say focus. Don’t get distracted and be persistent. I think we, as academics tend to sometimes underappreciate the skills that we generate as an academic and how useful they can be for things like starting your own business. I think if you’ve gone through a PhD, if you’ve gone through a postdoc, you’ve got the right skill sets to be able to run a business and to put a company together. The main thing that you learn how to do as a PhD student is problem-solving and, putting a company together is mostly problem solving. You know how to put an experimental plan together. You know how to budget and you hopefully have some mentoring experience. You have at least some ideas on how to run a team. The main thing when you move into something like this is just the focus and not getting distracted.

Annelise: You must think about the risk of everything you are doing. And communicate everything. Don’t be scared. I mean, to talk, to go and see people, to talk to them. People are willing to help. They are willing to support new ideas and to be in a new project.

Also, I think, lots of women, sometimes don’t really believe in themselves enough, and I think we need them to be more confident and to see that they are as capable as anyone else and they can go for it as well and they can move forward.

Narges: That is wonderful advice. Thank you, Pedro and Annelise. I wish you the best of luck for the rest of your journey.

Interview with INIA Biosciences | Changing the world of bioelectronic medicine

Narges Sheikhansari: Thank you so much Dragana for agreeing to this interview. Please tell me about your team. What are your backgrounds and your founding story? 

Dragana Savic (CTO): Every year, I coach an innovation team at Merck KGaA, the pharmaceutical company. And, in 2020 I was coaching the bioelectronics team. Bioelectronics is a very exciting field. It is a field where electricity or ultrasound can modulate physiology. One of the first bioelectronic devices on the market was the pacemaker. Big players like Verily and GSK are already invested in the bioelectronics field, and Merck KGaA is looking to enter this market too. The innovation cup is a unique competition, because besides bringing the smartest students, professionals and post-docs from all over the world, the ideas they develop must be sound to be incorporated into one of the departments or pipelines at Merck KGaA. This means, that the judging panel are various senior directors and senior managers who must commit and provide funding for the idea(s) they select as winners. Even the CEO is involved.

So last year, our team won one of theDragana Savic Inia Biosciences prizes. Our project was implemented in the innovation pipeline and two of of our team members were hired full-time to work on it. As we all know, 2020 was a difficult year and everything happened remotely.  Our team worked exceptionally well together and because it was the pandemic, we could decide to continue to work together, since we were spread all over the world. So we decided to continue our endeavours into bioelectronic medicine. One of the keys to success in a start-up is your team, and we knew we had found an exceptional team. The field was fascinating to us, so we thought we should try to capture a different market – the inflammatory market. And that’s how we continued.  

Inia Biosciences team montage
The leadership team at Inia Biosciences

 

 

 

 

Narges: That is interesting. So, what was the missing link in the industry or amazing technology development that motivated you to create your start-up?

Dragana: So, the brain controls everything in your body. But it has never been established before that we can modulate physiology with electrical signals, or with ultrasound that we’re using. As bioelectronics is really new,  we still have to explain to people what bioelectronic medicine actually is. I think that was the opportunity we grasped, because there were not many companies out there doing similar things.

Although there is more and more academic research showing evidence, academic research doesn’t always translate into human application. So, I think we really wanted to seize the opportunity to work on something that could be commercialized and not work on it as academics.

Narges: I see. I’m sure this was not without challenges. What have been the challenges to your success? What are the unexpected lessons you’ve had to learn?

Dragana: Well, one of our main challenges right now is that we are academics. I have an MBA. I studied my MBA part-time for a year, but that doesn’t make me a business expert.

And one of our biggest challenges is actually putting on our marketing and business hats.

We are seeking advice from our advisors, who are helping us to access the market and really figure out what the right strategy is to bring this forward.

Narges: That is a wise move. And what have been the key pieces of support that have helped you grow?

Dragana: Hmm, that’s a good question. Everyone will give you their opinion, which is fine and you should of course listen to experts’ opinions. But sometimes you can be pulled out in many different directions. And you’ll end up not focusing, because you just want to please the different advisors and the different experts. experts. You have to have a core vision and you have to believe in yourselves. It is important to us not to compromise on the quality or vision that we have, the long-term vision, not just the immediate goals that we have.

Narges: That is great advice. So what are your next steps? Where do you see your start-up in 5 years?

Dragana: We will have finished clinical trials and have a fully developed device that has been patented from many different angles. 

Narges: Wonderful. My last question is: do you have any advice for other scientist entrepreneurs looking to start-up their own innovation?

Dragana: Do it. And believe in yourself. I think as academics, we know that we never get a 100% clear answer on anything. And that makes us sound less confident when we speak to commercial people; when we speak to executives.

So, I’d say believe in yourself, believe in your expertise. Don’t have imposter syndrome, which most academics have. You know what you’re doing. You’re the expert in your field. So, just go for it. Try it. What harm can it do? Because at the end of the day, even as academics, we ultimately want to bring treatments to patients, and make the world a better place to be.

Narges: That’s great, thank you so much Dragana. 

To find out more about Inia Biosciences visit their website. 

Interivew with IMAGINE IF! Global Winners OXYJET

In November 2021, Oxyjet became the global winners of the IMAGINE IF! Accelerator 2021 when they pitched at the global finals at our Invest in Innovation conference. Oxyjet is an innovative start-up from Bangladesh that rose to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic by developing low-cost and electricity-free ventilators which would meet to needs of developing countries. Narges Sheikhansar sat down with Dr. Taufiq Hasan, Meemnur Rashid, and  Kaiser Ahmed Alman from the Oxyjet team to discuss their journey in developing this life saving device.

Narges Sheikhansari: Thank you once again for being here today. Please tell me a bit about your team. What are your backgrounds and what is your founding story? 

Meemnur Rashid: When we started this project, we were undergraduate students, yet to graduate. We started talking about this project back in March 2020. Back in March 2020, the first covid patient was found in Bangladesh. So, then Dr. Taufiq, our faculty member from the biomedical engineering department at Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), emailed us about what can we do as biomedical engineers during the covid situation. At that time, everyone was so hyped about working towards making low-cost ventilators, because when covid started spreading, no country in the world had enough ventilation support, or infrastructure to deal with all the patients. Even developed countries, like Italy, struggled with their healthcare system, when covid started to break out. So, at that time we started working on a ventilator, and then soon realized that it is a very sophisticated machine and that it was not feasible to deploy such sophisticated technology in our country within a short amount of time.

Dr. Taufiq Hasan: Yes, we started by finding a clinical need. We investigated the clinical scenario first, where we spent a lot of time, and then we defined the needs. We also spoke to doctors, to see what their needs are, how are they controlling the virus’ spread.

It became what’s known as frugal innovation, where we went back to the essential elements, or the must-have features, basically to reduce the cost to a point, where it becomes highly affordable.

So, we found this problem and then made a solution because of the COVID situation.

Narges: That’s really interesting. And what have been the challenges to your success? What are the unexpected lessons you’ve had to learn?

Meemnur: After COVID cases started spreading in our country, the government imposed a lock down, at very short notice. Everything including our university was shut down. We all started initial conversations online. But after that, knowing what the problem was and what we wanted to do, we couldn’t move around the city. Then again, we didn’t have all the equipment that was needed to develop and test our device. We initially used 3D printing technology to make the devices, and then we had to test the device.

Dr. Taufiq: So considering the situation and the lockdown, everybody on the team was taking risks by deciding to even work on this. At that time, when everybody was scared, we did what had to be done. Our university’s labs were closed. We didn’t have the equipment to calibrate our device. So those were the main challenges. Plus the sourcing, when we were buying things, if they were not available in the market we would sometimes have to import them, like a filter or masks. We received donations from a US company to facilitate this. When there was lockdown in the US, shipments were closed. The whole supply chain was impacted, and we couldn’t move around. All these challenges together slowed us down a lot.

Kaiser Ahmed Alman: Even when I went to the hospital, the traffic police stopped me and didn’t allow me to go to the hospital. Because I had no patient in the hospital. So, I had to tell them that, “no, we have a device, we are testing it on a patient”. So, I had to cross over all these restrictions.

Narges: I understand that the major challenge to your work were the national lockdowns. So, now that we have covered challenges, please tell me what have been the key pieces of support that have helped you grow?

Meemnur:  Being students, we didn’t know many aspects about how to develop a product, and how to evaluate it. We had to learn a lot of techniques, tools, technologies and software.

We never got demotivated no matter the problem we faced. We didn’t say, “no, we can’t do it.” We were always eager to learn something new.

Dr. Taufiq: Yes, so Meemnur was saying we never gave up. There were many others trying to make ventilators, but they gave up at different points along the way. We never stopped.

Narges: Amazing. And what are your next steps? Where do you see your start-up in 5 years?

Dr. Taufiq: We really want to have a global market and we plan to have FDA clearance and get vetting from the World Health Organisation (WHO). We’ve done quite bit of homework on this aspect; learning the FDA requirements for this kind of device. And we’ve discussed this with an FDA consultant to find out what the procedure is.

Narges: Wonderful. My last question is: Do you have any advice for other scientist entrepreneurs looking to start  their own innovation?

Meemnur: I would say, if you have found a problem, and you have a solution for it, stay motivated to solve that problem. You will find a way. You must be open minded and keep motivated. Never give up. We have overcome a lot of failures in our path. We struggled to find a solution to them, but we never gave up. Another piece of advice is to find a solution that fits within the existing system as it has a higher chance of acceptance.

Narges: Thank you so much for your great advice and for the interview.

Interview with Isaac Johnson, CEO of Verinnogen

Narges Sheikhansari: Thanks for accepting our invitation to this interview. It’s great to have you here today. So, the first question is about your team. What are your backgrounds and what is your founding story? 

Isaac Johnson: That’s a really great place to start. I think for us, it all started back, in 2019. So, back then I was a cancer research scientist with Cancer Research UK. I was a post-doctoral researcher there. I was in a lab which was doing preclinical assessments on new cancer therapies. And one of the things that we were doing was testing novel combinations of therapy in mice. What you do that is you use callipers to measure tumours that are growing under the skin of mice, to see whether your therapy has had any effect. I hated using callipers; absolutely hated it, because it was so variable. So, that initiated the idea that there must be a better way of doing this. And then I came up with a concept. Then, I met Mike Irvine in a competition, and we took onboard the comments we received during that process. Together we used our respective networks to find people who we thought might be able to bring this idea to life.

 

 

Narges: Interesting. That leads us to the second question, which you’ve kind of answered. What was the missing link in the industry or amazing technology development that motivated you to create your start-up?

Isaac: Absolutely. I think knowing what I know now, one of the absolute best ways to start a business is when you experience a need for yourself.

And the great thing for me is that we’ve been hearing a lot, from talking to different people, “I wish I had this tool when I was doing my research”.

Narges: Very well put. And what have been the key pieces of support that have helped you grow?

Isaac: I think it’s multifactorial. I think a lot of it is serendipitous and a lot of it was actively sought. So, our device uses a certain amount of optical technology and without the kind of support from someone who actually knows what they’re talking about, it wouldn’t have succeeded at all. Some things you can’t predict, some things you can’t see in advance. You just really try and find as many people that you can talk to as possible. Find out where your gaps in your knowledge are. Because there’s no point in bringing people in that already know what you know.

Narges: Good point. Now, have there been any challenges to your success? What are the unexpected lessons you’ve had to learn?

Isaac: You have to stick with the vision. Now, it might be that you need to iterate on that vision, and you know, you should be iterating regularly. But you still need a direction. You still need to know where you want to go, what you think is going to get you there and test those hypotheses. So, the key challenges were how to bring this device to life, and what were the key parameters. And you can think of 101 different options. I think the key thing was sticking with something, generating a robust hypothesis, and a robust means of testing, as well as gathering feedback and thinking about what that result means and bringing that into your ideas. So, the challenge is what the direction should be and allowing yourself to constantly evolve and change but at the same time, maintaining a clear direction. That’s a hard balance to achieve, because often one suffers at the expense of the other.

Narges: That’s very true. And having overcome such challenges, what are your next steps? Where do you see your start-up in 5 years?

Isaac: Well, I hope that in 5 years’ time , we will have released the product, that the product is performing well, and it’s making difference to cancer researchers not just in UK but globally as far as we can. However, I think the idea for us has always been that this is going to be something which will have a human application, and we have a few ideas about what that is already. But I think the key change I’ve seen in our mentality over the last couple of months is in thinking that we’re not just a preclinical oncology company. We are a medical device company and that’s where we want to end up. That’s what we want to be. We want to be at least testing the device and our ideas and other technology for direct human application. And if we get there in 5 years, I’ll be ecstatic.

Narges: That’s an interesting vision. I hope you succeed. My final question is do you have any advice for other scientist entrepreneurs looking to start-up their own innovation?

Isaac: Yes. I think looking back at my experience, the number one feasible piece of advice that I have is, if you’re thinking that entrepreneurism might be interesting, even if you don’t have an idea or anything concrete, especially with the university structure, there’s so much opportunity out there to learn more and to learn from others.

And so, I think as early as you can, start going to events, talk to different people, get involved, because it may be that you have that “aha” light bulb moment

one, two, three years down the line. But you’ve been involved enough, you’ve learned from your peers and everyone else around them. When you do have that moment you know what to do with it. And you know what your next steps are. I think even if you’re not an academic, and you just have an idea, there’s so much groundwork that can be put in, that really helps. Even if things don’t work out, the learning journey that I’ve made so far is huge. And obviously there are financial and personal implications as well which can’t be ignored, because your own personal health and mental health are key to overcoming the challenges especially early on, so you have to be in the right mindset. There are sacrifices you have to make. Using what you can to set up that groundwork would be the best chance you have of coping with those challenges. However, I’m also thinking, whatever you do learn from this process is going to be a valuable
asset if entrepreneurism and businesses are what you are looking for in the future. So, whether it’s asset management, joining funds, or joining commercialization groups, there’s so much that this time will teach you and that should not be ignored. So, if you have the means to do it, personally and financially, think about the benefits that you’ll have, even if things don’t work out.

Narges: Wonderful. Thank you so much Isaac.

Interview with Tanay Bhatt, Co-Founder at KoshKey

Narges Sheikhansari: Tell us about your team. What are your backgrounds and what is your founding story?

Tanay Bhatt: At this stage of pre-expansion, we have a small team consisting of Professor Colin Jamora, Ms. Shreyaa, and myself. I did my PhD under Prof. Colin’s guidance, on the topics of wound-healing, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and skin associated antimicrobial peptides. Towards the end of my PhD, we realised that antimicrobial resistance is considered a silent pandemic and our fundamental discoveries have a great translational potential to combat this global issue. We believe that the route of entrepreneurship will be best suited to developing our therapeutic solution. So, to achieve this, Colin and I are in the process of founding KoshKey, which will spin out from its academic setting.

Narges Sheikhansari: What was the missing link in the industry or amazing technology development that motivated you to create your start-up?

The global rise in AMR cases has alarmed various organisations, including the World Health Organisation (WHO) and hence, there is increasing pressure to develop new antibiotics.

Tanay Bhatt: However, the path of developing these is challenging and doomed to fail as the ever-evolving pathogens will eventually gain resistance against them. As an alternative approach, we decided to focus on host-mediated response to AMR bacteria. How does healthy skin heal injuries without getting infected? Why do certain comorbidities, such as diabetes, aggravate the problem? Our research has brought novel insights into the cellular pathways operating in healthy v/s diabetic skin conditions. This helped us develop an siRNA based topical solution, which not only boosts cellular response to AMR infections but also aids in rapid wound-healing. Almost like “killing two birds with one stone” for diabetic patients who are suffering from non-healing wounds and AMR infections.

Narges Sheikhansari: What have been the challenges to your success? What are the unexpected lessons you’ve had to learn?

Tanay Bhatt: Coming from an academic background has its own pros and cons. On one side we are reasonably good at troubleshooting biological and clinical issues in drug development. On the other side, we continue to face challenges in understanding and developing the business model of our entrepreneurship journey. We are learning business jargon almost every day e.g. go-to-market strategy, value proposition, revenue stream, breakeven analysis, and many more!

Narges Sheikhansari: What have been the key pieces of support that have helped you grow?

Tanay Bhatt: There are many factors that keep us motivated on our journey. Particularly our institute inStem along with C-CAMP have been very supportive of our new venture. We have also been supported by the Biotech Ignition Grant (BIRAC-Govt of India). Moreover, our family, friends and colleagues in the lab have been a constant source of encouragement.

Narges Sheikhansari: What are your next steps? Where do you see your start-up in 5 years?

Tanay Bhatt: On the technical side, we are constantly pushing ourselves to develop an advanced prototype of our topical solution and to finish the pre-clinical studies on animal models. Simultaneously, we are looking to secure sufficient funding to reach the Phase-1 clinical trial phase. In 5 years, we hope to see our start-up grow as one of the top businesses that encourages and employs future scientists to develop novel therapeutics for wound healing and AMR pathogens.

Narges Sheikhansari: Do you have any advice for other scientist entrepreneurs looking to start their own innovation?

Tanay Bhatt: Since most scientists are unfamiliar with the business realm, they can be intimidated by the overall process of getting their company incorporated. So, my advice is to have conviction in your product and to remember your purpose and goal for establishing your company.

Then comes, the next part which is seeking appropriate mentorship and funding. It is preferable to identify a potential business mentor and renowned incubators that can help guide you through this journey and achieve the milestones you have set. It’s also useful to have a dialog with other upcoming entrepreneurs in the field.

As long as you have a coherent idea of the vision of the company, and a good cohesive team that can carry out this vision, there is no way of stopping you from achieving success.

 

 

IFNY Interview with Fran Strauss, Principal at HealthMark Strategies, LLC

This month, Sabyasachi Dash of IFNY sat down with Fran Strauss, Principal at HealthMark Strategies in New York City.

Fran is a proven Reimbursement & Payer Commercialization Strategist and Market Access Executive with expertise in genetic testing, molecular diagnostics, medical/mobile devices, personalized medicine and diagnostic laboratories. She works with commercial and government payers, employers, unions and advocacy groups. Prior to her consulting career, Ms. Strauss led the Provider Relations and Network Department at Aetna Inc. She also led Market Access departments at Digene Corporation (now Qiagen), Adeza Biomedical (now Hologic) and Perlegen Sciences.

Dr. Dash’s conversation with Fran was beyond insightful: we learned about her life as a consultant with deep roots in biotech-entrepreneurship, what it has been like working with the life science industry as well as her advice for budding life science entrepreneurs.

What motivated you to pursuing a career in Women’s Health?

I pursued studies in Special and Health Education. In time that interest focused on Women’s Health, as an educator and then as a Biotech (Diagnostics) professional.

What are some personal and professional qualities that were critical for you to get where you are now?

Excellent communication skills, a passion for educating women and others in the business community about this important and overlooked niche.

How urgent do you think it is for academic-scientists to collaborate with Industry experts?

While academic scientists are doing an excellent job at identifying new technology with industry experts for Women’s Health, early and continued collaboration is critical for addressing the business needs (financial, clinical and social).

Given your involvement as a Biotech Mentor, are there any personal insights into why academic-scientists find it hard to blend in within Industry?

The passion and skills involved in the creation of new technology can often overshadow the real need for a practical sense of how to launch the product, the data needed to launch the product and how the product will be reimbursed and advocated for by Women’s Health professionals.

What are the common traits or, qualities needed in young scientists who aspire to become entrepreneurs, or who are seeking for industry transitions?

A realistic sense of the commercialization process. Does the product meet an unmet need? Does it lower, increase or remain neutral in terms of overall healthcare costs. Will insurers reimburse? And if yes, what is that process? Will this technology change behavior of physicians? Patients?

How do you foresee the future of Women’s Health in the next few years?

Increase in patient empowerment, mobile technology, big data.

Finally, before we close, what is that one ‘Mantra of Success’ that you would like to share with everybody irrespective of their professional background?

One must be informed, passionate, have a road map to success, and a real desire to improve health and lower costs of Women’s healthcare. Outcomes are key.