大成 Dentons: All about taxes
Trained as a tax specialist, he regularly advises healthcare companies but also major international groups on legal, tax and regulatory structuring issues. Le Guyader was formerly at Simmons & Simmons LLP, Ernst & Young Société d’Avocats and operated as Tax Director of the LEEM. He started his career at Laboratoires BOIRON as group tax specialist in charge of transfer prices. Le Guyader graduated from the ESC Lille and the University Paris I – Panthéon Sorbonne in Business and Tax Law, Public Law and Economics. He is also member of the Pharma Licensing Club France and administrator of the Association des Cadres de l’Industrie Pharmaceutique (ACIP).
Asit biotech: Expertise in vaccines
Before joining Asit biotech, he was CEO of Austrian company Intercell AG – which in 2013 merged with French company Vivalis create European vaccine and antibody leader Valneva. Zettlmeissl holds a doctoral degree in biochemistry from the University of Regensburg in Germany and did a post-doctoral fellowship in virology at the Institut Pasteur in Paris. Since 1985, Zettlmeissl has held various R&D and managerial positions at a number of international pharmaceutical companies, among others Managing Director of German vaccine company Chiron Behring.
In 2010, he was named Vaccine Biotech CEO of the Year at the World Vaccine Congress. Zettlmeissl currently serves as non-executive director of Aeras, (USA). Until early 2015, he was chairman of GlycoVaxyn (Switzerland), an innovative vaccine company acquired by GlaxoSmithKline.
Erstwhile Asit biotech Chairman Béatrice De Vos has stepped down “to focus on new projects”.
A clear path ahead for the bioeconomy
Matti, you say we need to stop using fossil fuels. But right now there hardly seems to be a consensus on that – especially among politicians. Are you sure this is going to happen in our lifetimes?
It is hard to be sure about such things – there are sometimes political decisions that defy logic and reason. But I most certainly hope so! I think the key there is to stop wishing it will happen and work towards that goal, by making renewable fuels and chemicals and good alternatives a viable choice for the oil-based industry. In fact, I already see the transition happening. There are big industries, in pulp and paper and packaging, and they all, especially in Europe, seem to share the vision that the chemicals and the materials that are made of oil today can be replaced and, in some cases, even better materials can be found using renewable resources.
Has Europe advanced further down the path towards a bioeconomy?
There is a much greater political will going in this direction, especially when compared with what is happening in the US. There are more market-driven approaches on the other side of the Atlantic, but I think there are not as many political drivers to go towards green objectives. Another benefit that we have in Europe is the strong co-operation that stems from the programmes like Horizon 2020, which puts together the best experts from both academia and the industry working towards common goals. This is getting much better nowadays – it’s a much more open and cross-disciplinary collaboration than it was before. One reason for this is: it’s a much more market-driven approach. People are sharing their information with their own benefit in mind. If they make the whole value chain work, it enables their business.
So it is all about the value chains?
Absolutely. For example, at MetGen, we have created an enzyme that is very good at converting the sugars in wood even at lower purity levels, just to help the value chain. It does not take anything away from us that the pre-treatment company makes a good pre-treated wood slurry as the substrate for our enzymes; and if a chemical company can then turn the result into a plastic bottle, that is also good for our business. It is all about collaboration to fix these value chains. So can we replace petrol-based chemicals in our lifetime? I believe we can do it much faster. Most of the technology already exists, and it is just a matter of connecting the dots, and the right capabilities and people.
How does Finland compete within the European bioeconomy?
Finland’s resources are almost all wood – similar to our Scandinavian neighbours, but different from many European countries. Even in the European-wide bioeconomy strategy, there are separate sections for different countries because the national capabilities and resources are so different. In Germany and the Netherlands, for example, the focus is heavily on biochemicals. The bioeconomy is driven by the industry that is strong locally. The same is true for Finland. Forestry and pulp and paper drives the bioeconomy relatively heavily here. At the same time, since we are up in the North, we do not have the same productivity when it comes to agriculture. We have the bioeconomy strategy implemented on the government level, and it also focusses on the wood-based biomasses. Our company, MetGen, also concentrates on those materials for the most part.
Isn’t it risky to rely on one resource only?
Actually, MetGen is not picky about the biomass. Wood is where our expertise really shines because that’s the harder substrate. As a rule of thumb, the more lignin you have, the harder it is to put it to economic use. However, the more we assess it, the more we realise that wood is actually a great resource. Wood is not really that expensive. It is also in year-round supply, while grass or straw need to be stored somehow, which then leads to practical issues that come with storing, like the risk of fire and the need for storage space. Also, wood has a lot of sugars to it. Eighty percent of it is sugar – you just need to know how to crack it. And not least, the supply chain is already there. Wood is already being utilised in large quantities. So to me, it is just about transitioning towards using biochemicals. MetGen aims to provide the new technologies for pulp and paper to do that.
How exactly do you do that?
Let me give you an example. We were requested to come up with a laccase that could survive a pH of 10 to 11, or even be at an optimum in this range, so that it could be used in Kraft pulping to help the bleachability and delignification of that process. The company that requested this hardly thought it was possible, but we agreed to give it a try. And five months later, we had that molecule industrially produced. And while it was requested by a single company, it now benefits the entire industry.
What role does the consumer play? Can bio-based products only succeed if there is a demand for environmentally friendly alternatives?
Not at all! The funny thing is: the Polyethylene Furanoate, or PEF for short, is not actually biodegradable. But it is a better alternative to PET. It is a better packaging material; it has better barrier properties than oil-based alternatives; it makes the beverage have a better shelf-life – the oxygen stays out and the carbonation stays in. So in a first step, it might not replace PET-bottles, but it is replacing aluminium cans and glass bottles. Because it has the same superior properties as those. Later, it will overtake the other plastic packaging. So the green alternative is actually better than we can get out of oil. And that’s the thing: For a bio-based alternative to succeed, it has to be as good as the petrol-based product but cheaper, or the same price but better.
So what is needed for the bioeconomy to come out on top?
What is needed for that to happen is us in Europe starting to put down money and investment on piloting and market demonstration of technologies. We use a lot of resources and money on research, but then we fail to finance the commercialisation of those technologies. The same is not true of the Chinese or the Americans. We use roughly 90 percent of our resources on research and the remaining ten on development. The same numbers in the US are roughly fifty-fifty, and in China, they use more money on the development and scale-up and commercialisation of things than research. So, what happens in a globalised world is that we use taxpayer money here in Europe to create good products, and then we end up selling them to other continents. My second point is the brain leak if you will. We have to make sure we have incentives for experts globally to come to Europe and help us solve these value chain-wide challenges I mentioned. Europe cannot be the place where we start building walls. Every expert that we get, no matter from what country, will create more work around themselves. So we should not be afraid of losing our jobs if foreign experts come over. Rather, we should be giving them incentives to come. Right now, people are moving away from Finland, and from Europe, to other places where there are more incentives for the brightest and the best of us to succeed. We really need them here.
Matti Heikkilä is Chief Technology Officer of Finnish bioeconomy company MetGen Oy, which develops enzymatic solutions for processing lignocellulosic biomass. Last year, MetGen won the John Sime Award for Most Innovative New Technology at the European Forum for Industrial Biotechnology and the Bioeconomy (EFIB). Heikkilä has more than a decade of experience in European industrial biotechnology.
Europe’s shield against falsified medicines
As a result, there is now legislation across national borders, which represents an important measure when it comes to effectively taking action against falsified pharmaceuticals. At the same time, the new legislation creates technologically standardised protection against falsified medicines. Now we have clarity on how pharmaceuticals in the legal supply chain are to be rendered safe from falsification, and we know these measures must be implemented by 9 February, 2019.
In the new legislation, the pharmaceutical companies have been assigned a central mandate. Each manufacturer must equip his own products with the anti-falsification features, but at the national level all manufacturers together are also responsible for the set-up and operation of the technical systems for the authentication of pharmaceuticals. Side-by-side, the pharmaceutical companies, as well as the pharmacies and wholesalers, are now forming a strong phalanx against organised pharmaceutical crime and for patient protection in Europe. However, it is in the nature of such a phalanx that any gap can become a weakness. Therefore, the participants must not only co-operate at the national level, but the national systems must be linked to form an anti-falsification network on a European scale.
In Germany, we started early on with the securPharm project and have made tremendous progress. In retrospect, this was the right way. The implementation of the requirements of the Falsified Medicines Directive and the delegated regulation has turned out to be the greatest infrastructure project of the pharmaceutical industry, and demands more time and effort than originally anticipated. In this respect, the manufacturers are shouldering the main financial and organisational burden. Therefore, they should no longer hesitate, and proceed to equip their products with safety features and set up national verification systems in the EU member states.
What’s important is closing the phalanx now and creating a gapless safety net to ensure that the pharmaceutical market in Europe becomes even safer.
Dr. Reinhard Hoferichter is spokesman for the board of directors of securPharm e.V., the organisation that develops the authentication system for prescription drugs in Germany. Hoferichter, a pharmacist, has held several management positions in the pharmaceutical industry in the fields of medicine, health policy, and quality management. Today, he is in charge of Public and Governmental Affairs at Sanofi-Aventis-Deutschland GmbH. He also serves on the management board of the State Chamber of Pharmacists for the state of Hesse.
Nanobiotix: Oncology expert
Dostie will be in charge of Nanobiotix’ operations, including development, manufacturing, market access, and sales, particularly for the lead product NBTXR3. The radio-enhancer could reach a CE market approval and a first phase II/III interim readout this year. Dostie, who holds a Bachelor of Science in Human Biology, joins the company after 25 years of international experience in the pharmaceutical industry, especially in market access and oncology. Previously, he worked as Oncology General Manager at Novartis Pharma GmbH in Germany.
Galapagos: To the clinic
Abi-Saab joins from Shire Pharmaceuticals, where he held various clinical development leadership positions, most recently Group Vice President, Global Clinical Development - Therapeutic Area Head, Gastro-intestinal, Endocrinology and Metabolism. Before Shire, the trained psychiatrist led the clinical development activities at Novartis, Abbott Laboratories, and Pfizer.