Pharma's Personalized Medicine Dilemma with Google et al and Treatment Guidelines | Diaceutics

Pharma’s Personalized Medicine Dilemma with Google et al and Treatment Guidelines

November 3rd, 2014

Maria Fe Paz
Patrick Considine

Maria Fe Paz and Patrick Considine of Diaceutics provide a further update on Google’s immersion into the health care realm and highlight an opportunity for pharma to collaborate.

We continue to follow Google’s inexorable march into health care and personalized medicine and have previously posted on this: [php snippet=34 param=”title=Google’s Entry Shifts the PM Tipping Point to The Edge&id=987″]. Periodically, we like to assess the new entrant threat to pharma. The recent announcement (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29802581) that Google is working on technology that combines disease-detecting nanoparticles, which would enter a patient’s bloodstream via a swallowed pill, with a wrist-worn sensor, seems on the surface to be relatively benign as a threat to pharma. The technology will potentially enable them to address a key unmet clinical goal in cardiovascular disease and cancer, namely early detection, and there is nothing inherently disruptive to pharma about early detection. In fact, it’s quite the opposite as many pharma companies, e.g., Roche, Novartis and Janssen, are making public their pursuit of diagnostic partnerships to identify disease earlier in the treatment pathway.

This further immersion into the health care realm comes just a few months after Google set out yet another challenging approach to improve the genetic and molecular knowledge of health, the Google Baseline study, as a way to detect diseases better and earlier. With Google’s proven capacity to manage and analyse huge amounts of data from healthy volunteers, the Baseline study will undoubtedly shed light into biomarkers, mutations and pathways related to the onset of diseases, and ultimately contribute to the personalization of therapies.

It is perhaps only when you stand back to look across the accumulating war chest of health care technologies and interventions in which Google is investing that the potential competitive rivalry of a powerful new health care entrant becomes more apparent.

A truly personalized medicine entrant would seek to move past the pill-centric business model of incumbents to reshape the traditional playground of the pharmaceutical industry, namely, guideline-driven treatment pathways. Thus, the vision and skill to introduce multiple integrating interventions, such as treatment, testing and education, alongside wearable monitors, to guide personal therapy decisions (versus rigid guideline adherence) is in fact the ‘disruption’ to a pharmaceutical industry which has too narrowly defined personalized medicine as a companion testing/targeted oncology paradigm and relies still (outside oncology) on its ability to shape therapy guidelines (versus treatment pathways).

Of course, Google protesteth that it is seeking to become a ‘pharmaceutical-style powerhouse’. Dr Conrad, inventor of this particular early detection system, is at pains to point out that, “We are the inventors of the technology but we have no intentions of commercialising it or monetising it in that way…We will license it out and the partners will take it forward to doctors and patients.” Recent partnerships, for example the glucose monitor contact lens with Novartis (http://www.novartis.com/newsroom/media-releases/en/2014/1824836.shtml), support this innovate, then partner, business model Google is promoting.

However, we note that industrial history is littered with such denials. Companies like Sony and Samsung have illustrated to us all that what starts as a business model to supply others with innovation is ultimately a Trojan horse business model to build scale, learn the rules and own key pieces of intellectual property and customer access.

And, of course, one cannot assess the threat from Google in the absence of the health care ambitions of the other consumer-facing powerhouses. Some game-changing initiatives are afoot there also, for example, Apple is partnering with major academic health care institutions including the Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai, Johns Hopkins and the Cleveland Clinic. They have all partnered with the technology giant to develop health care apps for use with enterprise solutions on Apple’s Healthkit. Amazon recently hired the inventor of Google Glass, Dr Babak Parviz, in what can be interpreted as acknowledgement of health as the new consumer technology frontier.

Pharma should welcome collaborations with Google, Apple and other patient-facing organizations in the short term, but they need to beware the clinical bridgeheads they are surrendering to companies with deep, deep pockets, clearly expressed health care ambitions and the greatest direct patient access of any companies on the planet.

Blogs

View all blogs

Webinars & Podcasts

August 9th, 2018
Podcast: Oncology Patient Research
Why do we need to talk biomarkers with patients? Senior Director of Market Research at Diaceutics, Marianne Fillion, recently spearheaded an effort to gather insights directly from oncology patients to get an understanding of what they know about ...
April 20th, 2018
Podcast: PM Readiness Report 2018
Peter Keeling discusses the landscape and challenges for precision medicine, companion diagnostics, CDx or biomarker and conduit diagnostics are discussed including global laboratory test data analysis and forecasts for budget impact and value.
View all

Expert Insights

April 19th, 2018
The CMS National Coverage Decision on NGS
I. Introduction On March 16, 2018, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) finalized a National Coverage Determination (NCD) that cove...
January 19th, 2018
What does the EU IVD Regulation mean for companion diagnostics and LDTs?
Dave Smart, PhD, Director at Diaceutics, discusses the introduction of the EU IVD Regulation. While it is considered a necessary step, the Regulati...
View all expert insights

Competitive Benchmarking Reports

March 16th, 2018
PM Readiness Report 2018 Summary
March 14th, 2017
Pharma Readiness for Diagnostic Integration 2017
View all reports

Case Studies

View all case studies

Publications

September 11th, 2018
BRAF mutation testing in melanoma – Poster presented at European Congress of Pathology 2018
BRAF mutation testing in melanoma: a study including Austria, Germany and UK, highlighting concordance for current technologies, and potential requirement of more sensitive technologies in future applications.
August 3rd, 2018
A Way Forward: Leveraging Advanced Diagnostic Testing to Unlock the Value of Precision Medicine
Read about how advanced diagnostic testing, ensuring that right patient gets the right therapy, at the right time, particularly with respect to therapies where the test result determines whether or not the therapy should be used (precision medicin...
View all publications
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
LinkedIn