By Ben Hirschler
LONDON (Reuters) – The line between pharmaceuticals and technology is blurring as companies join forces to tackle chronic diseases using high-tech devices that combine biology, software and hardware.
The plan to wrap a grain-sized electronic collar around nerves sounds like something from ‘Fantastic Voyage’, the 1966 sci-fi film in which a submarine is shrunk to fix an injured scientist’s brain, yet GSK and Alphabet are not alone in pushing the boundaries in medical tech in this way.
U.S. biotech firms Setpoint Medical and EnteroMedics
Others are miniaturizing technology in different ways.
“It’s an area that hotting up pretty fast because the technology is moving so fast,” said Hilary Thomas, chief medical adviser at KPMG.
Many of the world’s biggest pharmaceutical companies have turned to tech experts at Alphabet, including Swiss-based Novartis
Novartis Chief Executive Joe Jimenez has said that the combination of pharmaceuticals and technology will eventually be “front and center” in disease management.
Certainly, many technology companies are pushing hard into the healthcare arena, especially when it comes to finding new ways for patients to monitor their own health and track chronic conditions using smart devices.
Businesses such as Apple
Technology and pharmaceutical companies alike believe accurate monitoring using wearables will dovetail with a drive to offer so-called value-based healthcare.
The aim is to prove that medicines can keep large groups of patients healthy, thereby improving their appeal to cost-conscious insurers. That gives drugmakers a major incentive to offer services that go beyond routine drug prescriptions.
Real-time feedback on how patients are doing is one of the benefits of bioelectronics, according to Kris Famm, the GSK scientist who has been appointed president of the new jointly owned GSK-Alphabet company Galvani Bioelectronics.
“It will really help us hone the intervention,” he said. “This is almost the epicenter of convergence because the technology is not only helping you to monitor a disease but it is also actually the therapy.”
There are still plenty of hurdles ahead, including the need for multi-year clinical trials to prove that the new technologies are safe, effective and can deliver the kind of benefits to overall clinical outcomes that proponents hope.
Regulators such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also need to be convinced of the case for radically new ways of treating and monitoring patients.
“The challenge will be to make sure that regulators are on board, although the FDA is much more innovative than it was 10 years ago about accepting different endpoints for treating disease,” said KPMG’s Thomas.
(Editing by Anna Willard)