ABSTRACT
Academic institutions play a central role in the biotech industry through technology licensing and the creation of startups, but few data are available on their performance and the magnitude of their impact. Here we present a systematic study of technology licensing by one such institution, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Using data on the 76 therapeutics-focused life sciences companies formed through MIT's Technology Licensing Office from 1983 to 2017, we construct several measures of impact, including MIT patents cited in the Orange Book, capital raised, outcomes from mergers and acquisitions, patents granted to MIT intellectual property licensees, drug candidates discovered and US drug approvals-a key benchmark of innovation in the biopharmaceutical industry. As of December 2017, Orange Book listings for four approved small-molecule drugs cite MIT patents, but another 31 FDA-approved drugs (excluding candidates acquired after phase 3) had some involvement of MIT licensees. Fifty-five percent of the latter were either a new molecular entity or a new biological entity, and 55% were granted priority review, an indication that they address an unmet medical need. The methodology described here may be a useful framework for other academic institutions to track outcomes of intellectual property in the therapeutics domain.
Subject(s)
Academies and Institutes/legislation & jurisprudence , Biological Science Disciplines , Intellectual Property , Licensure/legislation & jurisprudence , Biotechnology , Drug Industry , MassachusettsABSTRACT
As universities and research hospitals move increasingly toward translational research and encouragement of entrepreneurship, more attention must be paid to management of conflicts of interest (COIs) if the public trust is to be maintained. Here, we describe COI policies at two institutions that aim to structure an academic environment that encourages innovation while protecting academic values.