Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

BUILDING A BUSINESS

Integrating scientific considerations into R&D project valuation

  • Building a Business
  • Published:

From Nature Biotechnology

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Traditional valuation approaches rarely take into account scientific considerations specific to a R&D project. A question-based approach using real options offers a solution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1: Decision tree of the younamamab case based on the QBCD analysis using the QOC tool.

References

  1. Bogdan, B. & Villiger, R. Valuation in Life Sciences, A Practical Guide (Springer-Verlag, 2007)

  2. Stewart, J. J., Allison, P. N. & Johnson, R. S. Nat. Biotechnol. 19, 813–817 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kola, I. & Landis, J. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 711–715 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Johal, S. S., Oliver, P. & Williams, H. C. J. Med. Mark. 8, 101–112 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pietzsch, J. B., Shluzas, L. A., Paté-Cornell, M. E., Yock, P. G. & Linehan, J. H. J. Med. Dev. 3, 021004-1–021004-15 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  6. ICH Expert Working Group. ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline: General Considerations for Clinical Trials E8, Step 4 version (International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, 1997).

  7. Huchzermeier, A. & Loch, C. H. Manag. Sci. 47, 85–101 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Harrison, M. H. & Lerer, L. Nat. Biotechnol. 29, 223 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Stewart, J. J. Nat. Biotechnol. 29, 223–224 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Villiger, R. & Bogdan, B. Drug Discov. Today 9, 552–553 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nichols, N. Harv. Bus. Rev. 72, 89–99 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hartmann, M. & Ali Hassan, A. Res. Policy 35, 343–354 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Evers, R. et al. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 96, 291–295 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Dolgos, H. et al. Drug Discov. Today 21, 517–526 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kenter, M. J. H. & Cohen, A. F. Lancet 368, 1387–1391 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. de Visser, S. A Question Based Approach to Drug Development. PhD Thesis, Leiden Univ. (Leiden, the Netherlands, 2003).

  17. Cohen, A. F., Burggraaf, J., van Gerven, J. M. A., Moerland, M. & Groeneveld, G. J. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 55, 55–74 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang, S. & Babovic, A. Decis. Support Syst. 51, 119–129 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saco J. de Visser.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2 and Supplementary Table 1

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Visser, S.J., Cohen, A.F. & Kenter, M.J.H. Integrating scientific considerations into R&D project valuation. Nat Biotechnol 38, 14–18 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0358-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0358-x

  • Springer Nature America, Inc.

Navigation