The revolution re-visited: Clinical and genetics research paradigms and the productivity paradox in drug discovery

Research Policy

Volumn 45, Issue 8, 2016, Pages 1570-1585

  Gittelman, Michelle ^a  

^a RUTGERS BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Basic and applied research; Biotechnology; Drug discovery; Pharmaceuticals; R D productivity; Science technology linkages

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; DRUG PRODUCTS; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; PRODUCTIVITY; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

BASIC AND APPLIED RESEARCH; DRUG DISCOVERY; INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE; MOLECULAR SCIENCE; POLICY INITIATIVES; PRODUCTIVITY PARADOX; SCIENCE TECHNOLOGIES; TECHNOLOGICAL REVOLUTION;

CHROMOSOMES;

EID: 84958068485     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.007     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Ahrens, E., The Crisis in Clinical Research. 1992, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
2. Ali, A., Gittelman, M., Research Paradigms and Useful Inventions in Medicine: Patents and licensing by clinical and basic scientists in Academic Medical Centers. 2016.
3. Angell, M., Is academic medicine for sale?. N. Engl. J. Med. 342 (2000), 1516–1518.
4. Arora, A., Gambardella, A., Complementarity and external linkages: the strategies of the large firm in biotechnology. J. Ind. Econ. 38:4 (1990), 361–379.
5. Arora, A., Gambardella, A., The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour. Res. Policy 23 (1994), 523–532.
6. Bains, W., Failure rates in drug discovery and development: will we ever get any better?. Drug Discov. World(Fall), 2004.
7. Bloom, F., Science as a way of life: perplexities of a physician-scientist. Science 300:June (2003), 1680–1682.
8. Bryan, C.M., Stinson, S., The choice: Lewellys F. Barker and the full-time plan. Ann. Intern. Med. 137:6 (2002), 521–525.
9. Campbell, W., Serendipity and new drugs for infectious disease’. ILAR J. 46:4 (2005), 352–356.
10. Carlsson, A., Questions and answers following the talks of Paul Greengard and Arvid Carlsson. CINP Newsl.(March), 2003.
11. Chung, K., Revitalizing the training of clinical scientists in surgery. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 120:7 (2007), 2066–2072.
12. Cockburn, I., Is the pharmaceutical industry in a productivity crisis?. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 2006, NBER, Cambridge.
13. Collins, F.X., Opportunities for research and NIH. Science, 2010, 327.
14. Collins, F.X., Reengineering translational science: the time is right. Sci. Transl. Med., 3, 2011, 90.
15. Comroe, J., Dripps, R., The scientific basis for the support of biomedical science. Science 192 (1976), 105–111.
16. DeMonaco, H., Ali, A., von Hippel, E., The major role of clinicians in the discovery of off-label drug therapies. Pharmacotherapy 26:3 (2006), 323–332.
17. Dougherty, D., Dunne, D., Digital science and knowledge boundaries in complex innovations. Org. Sci. 23:5 (2012), 1467–1484.
18. Eder, J., Sedrani, R., Wiesmann, C., The discovery of first-in-class drugs: origins and evolution. Nat. Drug Discov. 13 (2014), 577–587.
19. Fisher, L., The race to cash in on the genetic code. New York Times, 1999 August 29.
20. Fleming, L., Sorenson, O., Science as a map in technological search. Strateg. Manag. J. 25 (2004), 909–928.
21. Gavetti, G., Levinthal, D., Looking forward and looking back: cognitive and experiential search. Adm. Sci. Q. 45 (2000), 113–137.
22. Gelijns, A., Rosenberg, N., The dynamics of technological change in medicine. Health Aff. (Millwood) 13 (1994), 28–46.
23. Gelijns, A., Rosenberg, N., Moskowitz, A., Capturing the unexpected benefits of medical research. N. Engl. J. Med. 339:10 (1998), 693–698.
24. Gelijns, A.C., Zivin, J.G., Nelson, R.R., Uncertainty and technological change in medicine. J. Health Polit. Policy Law 26:5 (2001), 913–924.
25. Gittelman, M., National institutions, public-private knowledge flows, and innovation performance: a comparative study of the biotechnology industry in the United States and France. Res. Policy 35:7 (2006), 1052–1068.
26. Gittelman, M., Analytical Report on the Uptake and Diffusion of Health-Related Biotechnologies OECD Working Group on Biotechnology Report, DSTI/ISP/BIO(2006)/50., 2007.
27. Gittelman, M., Kogut, B., Does good science lead to valuable knowledge? Biotechnology firms and the evolutionary logic of citation patterns. Manag. Sci. 49:4 (2003), 366–382.
28. Goozner, M., The $800 Million Pill: The Trust Behind the Cost of New Drugs. 2004, University of California Press, Berkeley.
29. Grant, J., Green, L., Mason, B., From Bedside to Bench: Comroe and Dripps Revisited. GERG Research Report Number 30 (August)., 2003, Brunel University, Middlesex, UK.
30. Hamilton, D., Dose of reality - biotech's dismal bottom line: more than $40 billion in losses. Wall Street J., 2004 May 20.
31. Henderson, R., Pisano, G., Orsenigo, L., The pharmaceutical industry and the revolution in molecular biology: interactions among scientific, institutional, and organizational change. Mowery, D., Nelson, R., (eds.) Sources of Industrial Leadership: Studies of Seven Industries, 1999, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
32. Higgins, M., Thursby, M., Thursby, J., Bench-to-bench bottlenecks in translation. Sci. Transl. Med., 6(250), 2014.
33. Hollingsworth, R., Hollingsworth, E.J., Major Discoveries and Biomedical Research Organizations: Perspectives on Interdisciplinarity. Nurturing Leadership, and Integrated Structure and Cultures Working paper. 2006.
34. Hopkins, M., Martin, P., Nightingale, P., Kraft, A., Mahdi, S., The myth of the biotech revolution: an assessment of technological, clinical, and organizational change. Res. Policy 36 (2007), 566–589.
35. Institute of Medicine, Careers in Clinical Medicine. 2004, IOM, New York.
36. Jack, A., Drugs: supply running low. Financial Times of London, 2011 February 9.
37. Kenney, M., Biotechnology: The University-Industrial Complex. 1986, Yale University Press, New Haven.
38. Kola, I., Landis, J., Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates?. Nat. Drug Discov., 3(August), 2004.
39. Lederberg, J., The transformation of genetics by DNA: an anniverary celebration of Avery, MacLeod and McCarty. Nat. Genet. 136 (1994), 423–426.
40. LeFanu, J., The Rise and Fall of Modern Medicine. 2012, Basic Books, New York.
41. Ley, T., Rosenberg, L., The physician-scientist career pipeline in 2005. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 294 (2005), 1343–1351.
42. Lombardino, J.G., Lowe, J.A., The role of the medicinal chemist in drug discovery – then and now. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2 (2004), 853–862.
43. Luft, F., The role of the general clinical research center in promoting patient-oriented research into the mechanisms of disease. J. Mol. Med. 75 (1997), 345–350.
44. Merton, R., Barber, E., The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity. 2004, Princeton University Press.
45. Mitra, I., Why is modern medicine stuck in a rut?. Perspect. Biol. Med. 52 (2009), 500–517.
46. Mullard, A., An interview with Francis Collins. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov., 10, 2011, 14.
47. Nathan, D., Schechter, A., NIH support for basic and clinical research. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 295 (2006), 2656–2658.
48. Nathan, David, Careers in translational clinical research – historical perspectives, future challenges. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 287 (2002), 2424–2427.
49. National Institutes of Health, Office of the Budget, NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools. 2015 http://report.nih.gov/frrs/index.aspx.
50. Nelson, R.R., The role of knowledge in R&D efficiency. Q. J. Econ. 97:3 (1982), 453–470.
51. Nelson, R.R., On the uneven evolution of human know-how. Res. Policy 32 (2003), 909–922.
52. Rosenberg, N., Nelson, R.R., American universities and technical advance in industry. Res. Policy 23 (1994), 323–348.
53. Nightingale, P., A cognitive model of innovation. Res. Policy 27 (1998), 689–709.
54. Nightingale, P., Technological capabilities, invisible infrastructure, and the unsocial construction of predictability: the overlooked fixed cost of useful research. Res. Policy 33 (2004), 1259–1284.
55. Ng, R., Drugs: From Discovery to Approval. 2004, John Wiley, New Jersey.
56. Pavitt, K., The social shaping of the national science base. Res. Policy 27 (1998), 793–805.
57. Report to the President on Propelling Innovation in Drug Discovery, Development, and Evaluation., 2012, President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Washington, DC.
58. Rafols, I., Hopkin, M., Hoekman, J., Siegel, J., Perianes-Rodríguez, A., Nightingale, P., Big Pharma, little science? A bibliometric perspective on Big Pharma's R&D decline. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 81 (2014), 22–38.
59. Rasmussen, N., Steroids in arms: science, government, industry and the hormones of the adrenal cortex in the United States: 1930–1950. Med. Hist., 46, 2002 299–324.ef.
60. Rees, J., Complex disease and the new clinical sciences. Science 295 (2002), 698–701.
61. Rees, J., Two cultures?. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 46 (2002), 313–316.
62. Rees, J., The fundamentals of clinical discovery. Perspect. Biol. Med. 47:4 (2004), 597–607.
63. Robertson, D., Tung, C., Linking molecular and bedside research: designing a clinical research infrastructure. J. Mol. Med. 79:12 (2001), 686–694.
64. Rosenberg, N., Some critical episodes in the progress of medical innovation: an Anglo-American perspective. Res. Policy 38 (2009), 234–242.
65. Sams-Dodd, F., Target based drug discovery: is something wrong?. Drug Discov. Today, 10(January (2)), 2005.
66. Scannell, J., Blanckley, A., Boldon, H., Warrington, B., Diagnosing the decline in pharmaceutical R&D efficiency. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov., 11(March), 2012.
67. Schechter, A., The crisis in clinical research: Endangering the half-century. National Institutes of Health, Consensus, Commentary. J. Am. Med. Assoc., 280(16.), 1998.
68. Stokes, D., Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. 1997, Brookings Institute, Washington, DC.
69. Stuart, T., Ozdemir, S.Z., Ding, W.W., Vertical alliance networks: the case of university – biotechnology – pharmaceutical alliance chains. Res. Policy 36:4 (2007), 477–498.
70. Swazey, J., Fox, R., Remember the golden years of patient-oriented clinical research. Perspect. Biol. Med., 47(4.), 2004.
71. Swinney, D., Anthony, J., How were new medicines discovered?. Nat. Drug Rev. Discov. 10 (2011), 507–519.
72. Thiers, F., Sinskey, A., Berndt, E., Trends in the globalization of clinical trials. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 7 (2008), 13–14.
73. Thomke, S., von Hippel, E., Franke, R., Modes of experimentation: an innovation process – and competitive – variable. Res. Policy 27 (1998), 315–332.
74. Vincenti, W., What Engineers Know and How they Know It. 1993, Johns Hopkins University Press.
75. Vos, R., Drugs Looking for Diseases: Innovative Drug Research and the Development of the Beta Blockers and the Calcium Antagonists. Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine, vol. 120, 1991, Springer.
76. Wade, N., A decade later, human gene maps few new cures. New York Times, 2010 June 12.
77. Williams, V., Pathways of innovation: a history of the first effective treatment for sickle cell anemia. Perspect. Biol. Med. 47:4 (2004), 552–563.
78. Wyngaarden, J.M., The clinical investigator as an endangered species. Bull. N. Y. Acad. Med. 57:6 (1981), 415–426.
79. Zucker, L., Darby, M., Armstrong, J., Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Manag. Sci. 48:1 (2002), 138–153.