Latest / Making Medicine / FDA Shake-Ups & mRNA Funding Cuts | Industry Perspectives with Patrick Jordan

Transcript

FDA Shake-Ups & mRNA Funding Cuts | Industry Perspectives with Patrick Jordan · Making Medicine

• 0:05
  Speaker 1: Hello everyone, and welcome back to the Making Medicine podcast,
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: where science, policy and innovation meet. As always, I'm your host,
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: John Stanford. On today's episode, we'll cover the recent headlines
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: and introduce another new segment, Industry Perspectives, where we'll have
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: short form conversations with key voices in the life science
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: ecosystem about topics of the day. With that, let's get
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: into this week's episode. I'm excited to get into our
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: Industry Perspectives conversation, but first, here are a few things
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: worth thinking about this week. Uptop is the news that
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: doctor Vine Prissad will return to the FDA and run Sieber,
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: the Center for Biologics.
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: Evaluation and Research.
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Doctor Prosad started that job in May and then resigned
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: only a couple weeks ago following a dramatic turn with
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: the Duchane's Muscular Disorder DMD community after pausing the use
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: of Serepta's gene therapy fallow the death of two patients.
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: Intense backlash led to the FDA reversing course and allowing
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: the use of that gene therapy, but it was certainly
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: a scar on doctor Prissad's beginning tenure. Probably more notable
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: and maybe more consequential. However, was growing concern among conservatives
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: that he simply wasn't Trump enough due to some old
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: social media posts that didn't show support for the president.
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: Doctor Prisad nominally said he wanted to return to California
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: to spend time with his family, and yet here we
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: are only ten days later and he is coming back
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: to the FDA. Shakespearean anticks aside, the bigger question is
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: how is our industry supposed to move forward with certainty
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: when there are so many tumultuous changes at the agency
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: responsible for giving certain to the American public that the
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: medicines were investing in and growing actually work. Also in
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: the news this week is HHS's cancelation of five hundred
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: million dollars of BARDA contracts that was ostensibly for more
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: reach into mRNA. mRNA stands for messenger RNA. It's a
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: type of genetic material that carries instructions from DNA to
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: the cells protein making machinery. In short, it tells your
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: cells what proteins to make, and proteins being essential for
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: cell function. It's like mRNA is a recipe telling the
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: cells which one to build. In the news ever since
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: covid are mRNA vaccines which use this process. Instead of
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: a traditional vaccine injecting a piece of a virus, mRNA
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: vaccines give your cells instructions to make a piece of
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: the virus like the spike protein in COVID nineteen, which
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: then trains your immune system to fight against it. So
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: mRNA has certainly come into vogue over the last five years,
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: but it's not without controversy. It's actually at the center
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: so much of the vaccine debate that RFK Junior has
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: participated in. And so it's both with no surprise but
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: a decent amount of concern that the HHS took the
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: next step at the leadership level to move away from
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: mRNA research. We've gotten competing explanations out of HHS for
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: the cancelation of these contracts and concern about mRNA more broadly,
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: HHS Secretary RFK Junior he cited concerns about the mRNA
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: vaccines effectiveness against respiratory infections, framing the decision as a
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: shift towards what he described as safer, broader vaccine platforms.
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: So from the Secretary's perspective, it's just simply that mRNA
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: vaccines aren't as effective, but NIH director Jay Bodicharia, speaking
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: on Steve Bannon's War Room podcast earlier this week, offered
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: a different perspective. He commented that there just isn't willingness
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: among the American population to take mRNA vaccines, and there
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: is some truth to that. mRNA vaccines have had higher
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: skepticism rates than traditional vaccines, and we've seen that in
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: some of the uptick, But it's divergent opinions and explanations
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: that give industry why are we canceling vaccine research? And
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: response from the broader scientific community was swift and loud.
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: Michael Osterholm, who runs the Center for Infectious Disease Research
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: and Policy at the University of Minnesota, said quote, this
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: may be the most dangerous public health judgment that I've
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: seen in my fifty years in this business. It is
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: baseless and we will pay a tremendous price in terms
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: of illnesses and deaths. I'm extremely worried about it, as
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: one of several folks who responded publicly saying this is
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: the wrong direction and a growing concern, and there is
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: a lot of promise around the mRNA platform. And finally,
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: we continue to wait on President Trump's announcement of possible
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: tariffs related to pharmaceuticals that'll follow closely the end of
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: the section two thirty two investigation. If that terms new
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: for you, check out our in depth tariffs episode where
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: we talked about the Department of Commercer's investigation into national
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: security concerns around the development of drugs abroad. Either way,
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: industry does seem to be waiting for the shoe to drop.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: President Trump has teased a possible two hundred and fifty
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: percent tariff, maybe phased in over time, maybe not, the
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: implications of which we get into in our tariff's episode.
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: But you should follow us on LinkedIn, Instagram and all
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: the other places we provide updates because news is coming.
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: Next up, we have our first industry perspective segment, and
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: who better than to bring back one of our most
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: popular guests, Patrick Jordan of Nova Quest Capital.
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: Patrick, Welcome back to the show.
• 5:35
  Speaker 3: John, Thanks so much for having me. It's a pleasure
• 5:37
  Speaker 3: to see you. Well.
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: We're here to take an industry perspective at some of
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: the things going on we've talked a little bit about
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: earlier today on the show. The Doctor Vena prosad Saga
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: soap opera whatever you want to call it. Not speaking
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: necessarily to the specifics of that, but how critical from
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: an investor perspective is certainty out of the FDA view
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: times things like what does that mean to you to
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: have a predictable FDA?
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: It's key. I mean, look that the whole enterprise of
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: drug development is written with uncertainty from the start. You
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: think about just scientific discovery at its basis, that is
• 6:14
  Speaker 3: an uncertain endeavor and uncertain outcome. And so when you
• 6:18
  Speaker 3: have around that uncertainty around regulatory positions pricing, that makes
• 6:24
  Speaker 3: not only the efforts of trying to get a drug approve,
• 6:28
  Speaker 3: but to finance a drug it becomes even challenging too,
• 6:32
  Speaker 3: because the market pays close attention to that uncertainty and
• 6:36
  Speaker 3: wants to avoid the market risk zooming out.
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: Novaquest big fund, key player, both not just in the
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: Great North Carolina ecosystem, but nationally even globally. How's the environment?
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: It has been a painful three years, five year? I mean,
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: it depends on how long you want to say. But
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: what trends are you seeing big picture over at Novaquest?
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: How are you thinking about this current moment?
• 7:03
  Speaker 3: I think you're right to call it a challenging market.
• 7:07
  Speaker 3: I've always been someone who looks towards the bright side
• 7:11
  Speaker 3: of things. If time period it has been really about
• 7:15
  Speaker 3: four years of difficulty for biopharma. You think about the
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: endices being at their high in February of twenty twenty one,
• 7:26
  Speaker 3: but since then there was just a lot of compression
• 7:29
  Speaker 3: on values of companies, and a lot of companies went
• 7:33
  Speaker 3: through a period of trading at points that were less
• 7:36
  Speaker 3: in their cash value, and then many of them disappeared.
• 7:40
  Speaker 3: The optimism that I've got is that, nonetheless, you have
• 7:44
  Speaker 3: some very attractive industry with outstanding innovation that needs to
• 7:50
  Speaker 3: find a path forward. The industry as a whole, and
• 7:53
  Speaker 3: I've been a part of this for thirty plus years.
• 7:56
  Speaker 3: I think has a lot of enthusiasm for finding treatments
• 7:59
  Speaker 3: that make a difference in patients' lives, whether that's in
• 8:02
  Speaker 3: the US or globally.
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: And I think it's paradoxical that we're in this moment
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: of compression and yet rising populism across the board. And
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: that's not just limited to the Trump administration. I mean,
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: we are in a populist moment where historic policy beliefs
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: aren't really in vogue and so one of the common
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: ones is people are frustrated about the cost of healthcare.
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: Drugs are out front as being a part of healthcare,
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: and just this relentless pressure of people being upset about
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: drug prices, and yet biotech pharma more broadly are living
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: through this very painful capital markets moment. How do you
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: think that that populism is playing a role. And you're
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: someone who I know, whether it's through your leadership in
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: your state association, I know you get to Washington. Do
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: you see a through line between that populism and that
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: frustration with some of the policies I've heard you kind
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: of speak out against in.
• 9:09
  Speaker 3: Washington, John, It is one thing that I very much
• 9:13
  Speaker 3: understand just as a consumer, as a patient, as someone
• 9:17
  Speaker 3: as a family that are patients. When you think about
• 9:19
  Speaker 3: pricing of pharmaceutical products, I get it, and I know
• 9:23
  Speaker 3: I can speak for myself, but I think for a
• 9:25
  Speaker 3: lot in our industry, we're really moved to make medicines
• 9:30
  Speaker 3: more affordable, more effective, to bend down the cost of
• 9:34
  Speaker 3: care overall. When you think about it, it's useful to
• 9:37
  Speaker 3: put things in perspective. The pharmaceutical industry actually makes a
• 9:40
  Speaker 3: very small percentage on a relative basis to the overall
• 9:44
  Speaker 3: cost of spending for staying healthy. So it has become
• 9:50
  Speaker 3: a bit of a lightning rod for the industry because
• 9:52
  Speaker 3: it becomes so front and center when you're talking about
• 9:54
  Speaker 3: comparing prices in the US to other markets, which behave
• 9:59
  Speaker 3: very differently.
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: On a previous episode, you've talked about the small molecule penalty,
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: the passage of the Epic Act, and you know, since
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: that conversation, another issue, of course, has arisen, and that's
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: this concept of tying prices for drugs in the US
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: to what we pay or to what foreigners pay. Foreign
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: reference pricing, what President Trump calls most favored nation, I mean,
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: the ultimate populist idea, Hey they've got it cheaper over there,
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: that's the price we should pay. As someone so ensconced
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: in this, can that work? What's flawed with the idea
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: of let's all just pay lowest possible prices.
• 10:43
  Speaker 3: I think the intention is good that we want to
• 10:47
  Speaker 3: make medicines the most affordable for as many people in
• 10:52
  Speaker 3: the US as possible. The intention for most favored nation
• 10:55
  Speaker 3: pricing making our drugs the same price or less than
• 10:59
  Speaker 3: anybody else's. I think that intention is a reasonable one,
• 11:02
  Speaker 3: but the practicality of it is where I think has
• 11:06
  Speaker 3: gone wrong. The healthcare delivery systems in the US is
• 11:10
  Speaker 3: fundamentally different from say in Europe, where you have much
• 11:15
  Speaker 3: broader access. In the US, you have middlemen PBMs that
• 11:21
  Speaker 3: are involved in the distribution between pharmaceutical company and the
• 11:27
  Speaker 3: eventual patient, and so in a lot of ways, trying
• 11:30
  Speaker 3: to implement most favored nation pricing without recognizing the differences
• 11:35
  Speaker 3: in the US to say Europe is like trying to
• 11:38
  Speaker 3: do an organ transplant that's not matching the donor to
• 11:42
  Speaker 3: the recipient. You might be able to get it done,
• 11:44
  Speaker 3: but long term, eventually the patient doesn't do well.
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: That's the best analogy. We are absolutely going to steal that.
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: Will attribute it here to Patrick Jordan. But it is
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: like an organ transplant where the donor doesn't match up
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: with the patient and it may work for a minute,
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: but it's not going to work long term. We are
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: absolutely stealing that.
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: Patrick.
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: You know one of those basket countries that can get
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: referred to, and it's a place I think you and
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: I share a fondness for, and that's Japan. And Japan
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: has publicly said they are very concerned about their drug
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: lag and drug loss because of their pricing policies. Seventy
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: percent of medicines available in the US that are innovative
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: over the last couple of years not available in Japan.
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: And if I remember correctly, you know, for our listeners,
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: I've had the opportunity of going around Washington with Patrick
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: and one of the stories you shared really stuck out
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: because in this MFN debate, we haven't talked about the
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: pricing in foreign countries. And when I talk to people
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: and we say, oh, a drug cost twice as much
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: here than it does in Europe or Japan, they still assume, well,
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: it must be your for profit company. You must be
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: selling in Europe and still making profit, so you'd still
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: make that profit over here. That's a misconception. And you
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: opened my eyes to a unique experience you've had. You
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: dealt with potentially selling a product in Japan, and I
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: don't think they wanted to be too fair on pricing.
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: Can you share a little bit of the specifics of that,
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: and what's your takeaway of it wasn't just unreasonable, it
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: was unprofitable.
• 13:31
  Speaker 3: Yeah, And you're right, you and I share that strong
• 13:35
  Speaker 3: affinity for Japan. In fact, I was just there a
• 13:38
  Speaker 3: couple of weeks ago. And historically the Japanese market's been
• 13:42
  Speaker 3: an extraordinary pharmaceutical marketplace, a lot of great innovation. But
• 13:48
  Speaker 3: as you're describing, over recent years, the pharmaceutical industry has
• 13:52
  Speaker 3: really slowed and so there is a need for rekindling
• 13:57
  Speaker 3: that innovation. Unfortunately, there some currents that need to be overcome,
• 14:03
  Speaker 3: and it does come to pricing. We've seen in pharmaceutical products,
• 14:08
  Speaker 3: particularly with smaller companies that are looking to enter, say
• 14:12
  Speaker 3: the Japanese market, there's a pricing system that will evaluate
• 14:16
  Speaker 3: the drug and find the closest comparator product, and sometimes
• 14:21
  Speaker 3: that comparative product could be a generic. Just because it's
• 14:25
  Speaker 3: a comparator doesn't mean that it is equivalent. In fact,
• 14:29
  Speaker 3: it may well be inferior. But nonetheless, you have a
• 14:33
  Speaker 3: comparator drug that has an inferior profile and a lower
• 14:39
  Speaker 3: cost that goes against a better drug that has better
• 14:44
  Speaker 3: results for the patient. And if you're trying to peg
• 14:47
  Speaker 3: that to low cost drugs that haven't been innovated in
• 14:51
  Speaker 3: twenty thirty years, pharmaceutical companies rightly would reach the decision,
• 14:56
  Speaker 3: we can't deploy this drug and make it available to
• 15:00
  Speaker 3: the thousands, if not millions of patients in a market
• 15:03
  Speaker 3: because pricing just simply doesn't allow it. It becomes infeasible
• 15:07
  Speaker 3: for a company to present to patients is an.
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: Option this is, it's such.
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: I want to I want to stay with that and
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: almost say it back to you because I think this
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: actually will be eye opening for some people because we
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: don't really think about comparators in the u US. Yes,
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: when you get into the weeds of approaching a pair,
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: you know they're going to look at what else is
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: in that class. So it's not like this is totally foreign.
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: But to the American patient, it is foreign. It's no
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: pun intended. You know, your jog, your doctor writes you
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: script and you go fill it at Walgreens or CBS.
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: We are agnostic on the making medicine podcast of and
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: independent pharmacies. So this idea that you're going to a
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: country saying, hey, we've got this great new drug. It's
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: going to be meaningful for a patient population, and they're
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: almost pulling up up. Okay, well, it's similar to this drug.
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: It's in the same ballpark treating this disease. We want
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: you to price it similar to that, And you know
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: I'm thinking of TVs only because I'm in the market
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: for TVs, and it's like saying, hey, you need to
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: price your product the same as an RCA set out
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: of the nineties, even though your new TV is capable
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: of doing infinitely more, being more helpful, it's brighter, you
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: can see dark parts of the screen, and all the
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: good things the innovation valued.
• 16:35
  Speaker 2: Hey, Patrick, you've got to price.
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: It like an RCA set, which might be thirty five
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: cents even possibly lower than the cost of production. Am
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: I hearing that right? Am I saying that right?
• 16:46
  Speaker 3: Yeah? You absolutely are. And I think the analogy to
• 16:50
  Speaker 3: the TV is a good one that unfortunately you have
• 16:54
  Speaker 3: over the course of the last decades. You know, advancements
• 16:57
  Speaker 3: and televisions just like you do dancements in pharmaceutical products,
• 17:02
  Speaker 3: And in order to finance and fund those advancements, you
• 17:06
  Speaker 3: need to have an attractive price point for the end product.
• 17:10
  Speaker 3: And that end product may have a whole lot better attributes,
• 17:13
  Speaker 3: just like you're describing on the TV. The pharmaceutical product
• 17:16
  Speaker 3: would have the same thing, better utility, better tolerability, better
• 17:20
  Speaker 3: outcomes to the patient, and that does require investment. Oftentimes
• 17:25
  Speaker 3: that investment goes over many years, even decades, and so
• 17:30
  Speaker 3: pharmaceutical companies do need to have a mechanism to recover
• 17:34
  Speaker 3: and to make profits from such investment and that risk
• 17:38
  Speaker 3: that they've undertaken.
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah, one of your fellow investors was nudging me recently
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: with a war on the word recoop and not using
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: because the point isn't recooping. I think your LPs at
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: novaquest would not be very amused if you only recouped
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: the investments. But there has to be a return on
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: that investment. And I just think it was so stark
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: in the meetings that we shared together where you share
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: this anecdote of a country was asking you to sell
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: your product at possibly lower than the cost of goods produced.
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: I mean, that is the system. It's not hey, we
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: can make a little less profit. It is in one
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: of these systems you might make no profit. And yes,
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: the rest of the world is free writing on the US,
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: but if the me I'll put this to you, I
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: won't lead the witness here. If the US priced medicines
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: the way some European countries or Japan does, would you
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: be able to raise money to invest in new medicines or.
• 18:46
  Speaker 3: It would definitely stifle innovation and the access to capital.
• 18:49
  Speaker 3: Think about it this way. Large companies may be able
• 18:52
  Speaker 3: to make a decision, a business decision to enter in
• 18:55
  Speaker 3: a market and have a lost leader on a product.
• 18:59
  Speaker 3: They've got a bigger portfolio that would be able to
• 19:01
  Speaker 3: balance out on pricing. Small companies they simply don't you know,
• 19:07
  Speaker 3: that drug that they're trying to get into a new country,
• 19:10
  Speaker 3: maybe the only drug they have, and so you're not
• 19:14
  Speaker 3: able to share the load, balance the load across your portfolio,
• 19:18
  Speaker 3: and that matters an innovation. When you think about FDA approvals.
• 19:22
  Speaker 3: Over the last several years, two thirds of FDA drugs
• 19:25
  Speaker 3: that are approved. Drugs that are approved by the FDA
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: are from small companies outside of the top twenty biopharma
• 19:32
  Speaker 3: who simply don't have a big portfolio to balance the
• 19:36
  Speaker 3: load on.
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: So your point, I think maybe we haven't heard enough of,
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: is something like MFN or some of these ideas disproportionately
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: harm a small biotech who just can't spread the impact
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: across an entire company.
• 19:53
  Speaker 3: That's a fair way to describe it.
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: Well, you've been very generous with your time. I can't
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: think of it anyone better to have on our first
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: segment of industry perspectives. I hope it won't be the last,
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: but any closing thoughts that and maybe it's always good
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: to end on a positive note.
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: What's got you energized this year?
• 20:14
  Speaker 3: As I said at the outset, John, I'm a market
• 20:17
  Speaker 3: optimist in terms of the pharmaceutical industry. The pace of
• 20:21
  Speaker 3: innovation I think can go without bound. The ways that
• 20:27
  Speaker 3: we can streamline drug development, improve predictability of outcomes, increase
• 20:33
  Speaker 3: the value that we have for pharmaceutical products, to bend
• 20:37
  Speaker 3: the cost of care. I'm a believer that the industry
• 20:40
  Speaker 3: has a great opportunity to do it, and I think
• 20:42
  Speaker 3: we can do it with the right mindset of approaching
• 20:45
  Speaker 3: pharmaceutical products with a way to make them affordable, make
• 20:49
  Speaker 3: them accessible to patients. And that's the real result that
• 20:52
  Speaker 3: I think the industry is trying to get to, to
• 20:55
  Speaker 3: make these drugs that are at a price point that
• 20:58
  Speaker 3: is reasonable for patients, that ultimately reduces the cost of
• 21:02
  Speaker 3: care and improves lives.
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: He is Patrick Jordan of Nova Quest Capital. Thank you,
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: Patrick for your time today and joining our first industry
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: perspective segment.
• 21:11
  Speaker 3: John, thanks for having me.
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: That's all for this episode of the Making Medicine podcast
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: reminder to subscribe to our YouTube channel so you can
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: stay up to date on the world of policy and innovation.
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: Follow us on LinkedIn, x and Instagram using the links
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: in the description of this video, and as always, keep innovating.