Cover Image
Market Research Report
Product code
1017506

Targeted Protein Degradation Market: Focus on Technology Platforms and Therapeutics (2nd Edition): Distribution by Type of Protein degrader (degronimids, PROTACs, SARDs / SERDs, specific BET, DUB and other inhibitors), Therapeutic Areas

Published: | Roots Analysis | 330 Pages | Delivery time: 1-2 business days

Price

Back to Top
Targeted Protein Degradation Market: Focus on Technology Platforms and Therapeutics (2nd Edition): Distribution by Type of Protein degrader (degronimids, PROTACs, SARDs / SERDs, specific BET, DUB and other inhibitors), Therapeutic Areas
Published: March 31, 2021
Roots Analysis
Content info: 330 Pages
Delivery time: 1-2 business days
  • ALL
  • Description
  • Table of Contents
Description

Title:
Targeted Protein Degradation Market:
Focus on Technology Platforms and Therapeutics (2nd Edition): Distribution by Type of Protein degrader (degronimids, PROTACs, SARDs / SERDs, specific BET, DUB and other inhibitors), Therapeutic Areas (Neurological Disorders, Oncological Disorders and Others), Route of administration (Oral, Intravenous and Others), Key Contributing Technologies and Key Geographies (North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, MENA, and Rest of the World), 2021-2030.

VISUALS

Overview:

Targeted protein degradation is a revolutionary pharmacological concept that presents viable drug development opportunities and is anticipated to introduce a new paradigm in modern therapeutic interventions. Due to various reasons, conventional drugs / therapies have been limited in terms of their capability to target certain proteins of pathological significance. Presently, medical researchers engaged in the development of bifunctional protein degrader-based interventions claim that this upcoming class of drugs is capable of targeting biomolecules in the human proteome, which were previously considered undruggable. The concept of targeted protein degradation revolves around the use of small molecule leads, which are capable of recruiting the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS) to selectively eliminate a target biomolecule. In other words, protein degraders regulate biological pathways by selectively downregulating a target protein by degrading them; this process has been shown to be robust, more sensitive to drug-resistant targets and can regulate cellular functions that are not dependent on enzyme action. Moreover, drugs designed based on this relatively novel concept, have been shown to demonstrate a remarkable level of selectivity, high potency, oral bioavailability and differentiated pharmacology, compared to traditional enzyme inhibitors. As a result, this upcoming class of drugs has garnered significant interest within the medical science community. In fact, the growing popularity of targeted protein degradation is evident in the USD 5 billion in capital investments made into companies engaged in this field of research, since 2014.

Proteolysis targeting chimera (PROTAC), developed by Hashimoto Laboratory in 2008, was the first targeted protein degrader. The incessant efforts of researchers involved in this domain have resulted in significant progress towards understanding the physiochemical and biological properties of such bifunctional molecules. Presently, there are several other types of targeted protein degraders and molecular glues, which have been / are being developed for the treatment of a variety of clinical conditions, including acute myeloid leukemia, Alzheimer's disease, breast cancer, myelofibrosis, multiple myeloma, Parkinson's disease, prostate cancer, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and supranuclear palsy. It is worth noting that the R&D efforts in this field are supported by DNA-encoded libraries and other in silico hit discovery and characterization tools. In the last 4-5 years, there has been a marked rise in the number of new entrants in this market. Additionally, several big pharma players are also actively involved in this field, evaluating proprietary protein degrader-based therapeutic leads. The market has also witnessed substantial partnership activity over the last few years, with several technology developers involved in high-value licensing deals. Although, there are no approved protein degrader-based drugs / therapy products, the market is poised to witness healthy growth over the next decade.

Scope of the Report:

The 'Targeted Protein Degradation Market: Focus on Technology Platforms and Therapeutics (2nd Edition), 2021-2030: Distribution by Type of Protein degrader (degronimids, PROTACs, SARDs / SERDs, and specific BET and DUB inhibitors, and other inhibitors), Therapeutic Area (Neurological Disorders, Oncological Disorders, and Other Therapeutic Areas), Route of administration (Oral, Intravenous and Others), Key Contributing Technologies and Key Geographical Regions (North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and North Africa, and Rest of the World)' report features an extensive study of the current and future potential of protein degraders, offering an informed opinion on the likely adoption of these therapeutics and affiliated technologies, over the next decade. The focus of this study is on specially designed small molecule degraders, including degronimids, endosome targeting chimeras (ENDTACs), epichaperome inhibitors, hydrophobic tags, immuno-modulatory imide drugs (IMiDs), lysosome targeting chimeras (LYTACs), molecular glues, photochemically targeting chimeras (PHOTACs), proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs), protein homeostatic modulators, selective androgen receptor degraders (SARDs), selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs), specific and non-genetic IAP-dependent protein erasers (SNIPERs), and specific bromodomain and extra-terminal motif (BET) inhibitors and deubiquitinase (DUB) inhibitors. In addition, the report features an in-depth analysis, highlighting the diverse capabilities of stakeholders engaged in this domain. Amongst other elements, the report includes:

  • A detailed review of the current market landscape of targeted protein degradation-based therapeutics, including information on type of protein degrader (degronimids, ENDTACs, epichaperome inhibitors, hydrophobic tags, IMiDs, LYTACs, molecular glues, PHOTACs, PROTACs, protein homeostatic modulators, SARDs, SERDs, SNIPERs, and specific BET and DUB inhibitors), phase of development (clinical, preclinical, and discovery stage) of product candidates, target indication(s), key therapeutic area(s), type of biological target(s), associated ubiquitin ligase(s) (if available), target signaling pathway (if available), mechanism of action (if available), type of therapy (monotherapy and combination therapy), route of administration (oral, intravenous and others). In addition, it presents a list on drug / therapy developer(s) (such as year of establishment, company size and location of headquarters), clinical study sponsor(s) and collaborator(s).
  • An overview of the overall landscape of target protein degradation enabling technologies, featuring an analysis based on type of degrader. In addition, it presents a list of targeted protein degradation enabling technology developers and analysis based on various parameters, such as year of establishment, company size and location of headquarters.
  • Detailed profiles of prominent players engaged in the development of targeted protein degraders (shortlisted on the basis of phase of development of pipeline products) . Each profile features a brief overview of the company, its financial information (if available), detailed description of their respective lead drug candidates, and recent developments and an informed future outlook. Additionally, each drug profile features information on the type of drug, current status of development, route of administration, target indications, and a brief summary of its developmental history.
  • Tabulated profiles of leading industry players (shortlisted on the basis of the number of candidates in development pipeline) . Each profile includes details on the innovator company (such as year of establishment, location of headquarters, number of employees, and key members of the executive team), recent developments, along with information on respective drug candidates.
  • An in-depth analysis of completed, ongoing and planned studies of various targeted protein degraders, highlighting prevalent trends across various relevant parameters, such as current trial status, trial registration year, enrolled patient population and regional distribution of trials, type of protein degrader, phase of development, study design, leading industry and non-industry players (in terms of number of trials conducted) , trial focus, target therapeutic area, key indications, and clinical endpoints.
  • A detailed analysis of grants that have been awarded to various research institutes for targeted protein degradation projects, in the period between 2017 and 2020, on the basis of important parameters, such as year of award, amount awarded, administering institute center, support period, funding mechanism, type of grant application, purpose of grant award, activity code, emerging focus areas of the grants, study section, popular NIH departments, study section, and type of recipient organization, highlighting popular recipient organizations, popular program officers and regional distribution of recipient organizations.
  • A detailed publication analysis peer-reviewed, scientific articles that have been published between 2017 and Q3 2019, highlighting the research focus within the industry. It also highlights the key trends observed across publications, including information on type of publication, year of publication, study objective, popular keywords, type of protein degrader, biological target, associated ubiquitin enzyme, number of publications, type of publisher, leading players (in terms of number of publications) , region, and key journals (in terms of number of articles published in this domain and impact factor of the journal) .
  • An insightful analysis of the patents filed / granted for targeted protein degradation enabling technologies, since 2018, taking into consideration various parameters, such as type of patent, publication year, geographical location, type of applicant, issuing authority / patent offices involved, CPC symbols, emerging focus areas, leading players (in terms of number of patents granted / filed in the given time period), patent characteristics and geography. The chapter also includes a detailed patent benchmarking and an insightful valuation analysis.
  • A list of key opinion leaders (KOLs) within this domain, and their assessment (based on the strength and activeness) represented in the form of 2x2 matrices. The chapter also includes a schematic world map representation (highlighting the geographical locations of eminent scientists / researchers) and an analysis evaluating the (relative) level of expertise of different KOLs, based on number of publications, number of citations, participation in clinical trials, number of affiliations and strength of professional network (based on information available on ResearchGate) .
  • An analysis of the partnerships that have been established in this domain, during the period 2014-2020, covering research agreements, product / technology licensing agreements, mergers / acquisitions, asset purchase agreements, R&D and commercialization agreements, IP licensing agreements, clinical trial agreements, product development agreements, and other relevant deals.
  • An analysis of the investments in the form of seed financing, venture capital financing, debt financing, grants / awards, initial public offerings (IPOs) and subsequent offerings, made at various stages of development of the companies engaged in this field.
  • A detailed deal structure analysis, highlighting cash flows and net present values of licensor and licensee, taking into consideration multiple likely scenarios of upfront, milestone and royalty payments.

One of the key objectives of the report was to estimate the existing market size and identify potential future growth opportunities of novel technologies for the development of targeted protein degraders. Based on the likely licensing deal structures and agreements that are expected to be signed in the foreseen future, we have provided informed estimates on the evolution of the market over the period 2021-2030. For estimating the future market opportunities for technology providers, we have considered the likely licensing deal structures and agreements that are likely to be established in the foreseen future. The future opportunity within the targeted protein degradation market has been segmented across (A) different types of protein degraders (degronimids, PROTACs, SARDs / SERDs, Specific BET and DUB Inhibitors, and other inhibitors), (B) therapeutic areas (oncological disorders, neurological disorders, and other therapeutic areas), (C) route of administration (oral route, intravenous route, and other routes), and (D) key geographical regions (North America, Europe and Asia Pacific). In order to account for future uncertainties associated with the growth of targeted protein degradation market and to add robustness to our model, we have provided three market forecast scenarios, namely conservative, base and optimistic scenarios, representing different tracks of the industry's growth.

The opinions and insights presented in this study were influenced by discussions conducted with several stakeholders in this domain. The report features detailed transcripts of interviews held with the following individuals (in alphabetical order):

  • Laura Itzhaki, Founder and Chief Scientific Officer, Polyprox Therapeutics
  • Louise Bergeron, Vice President, Xios Therapeutics
  • Martin Wiles, Vice President Business Development and Licensing, Almac Discovery & Gerald Gavory, Director of Biology, Almac Discovery
  • Jason Brown, Scientific and Business Development Director, Ubiquigent
  • Anonymous, Director of Oncology Research, Large Company
  • Anonymous, Chief Scientific Officer, Very Small Company
  • Paul Wallace, Chief Business Officer, Mission Therapeutics
  • Katrin Rittinger, Research Group Leader, Francis Crick Institute
  • Zhihao Zhuang, Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Delaware

All actual figures have been sourced and analyzed from publicly available information forums and primary research discussions. Financial figures mentioned in this report are in USD, unless otherwise specified.

Key Questions Answered:

  • Who are the leading industry and non-industry players engaged in this market?
  • What are the key therapeutic areas for which target protein degraders are being / have been developed?
  • Which geographies are the most active in conducting clinical trials on target protein degraders?
  • What kind of partnership models are commonly adopted by industry stakeholders?
  • Which are the leading administering institute centers supporting the research related to this domain?
  • What is the trend of capital investments in the targeted protein degradation market?
  • How has the intellectual property landscape in this market evolved over the years?
  • How is the current and future market opportunity likely to be distributed across key market segments?

Chapter Outlines:

Chapter 2 is an executive summary of the insights captured in our research. It offers a high-level view on the current state of targeted protein degradation-based drugs market and its likely evolution in the short-mid- term and long term.

Chapter 3 provides an introduction to protein homeostasis, including a discussion on the UPS for intracellular protein degradation and turnover. It presents an elaborate discussion on the structure and function of ubiquitin, various components of the UPS and key steps involved in the UPS-based protein degradation. Further, the chapter provides an overview of the concept of targeted protein degradation, including details on various protein degraders and their associated pathways and mechanisms of action. The chapter also includes a discussion on the historical evolution, importance, advantages and challenges associated with the use of targeted protein degradation as a therapeutic principle. In addition, the chapter describes the key growth drivers and roadblocks related to targeted protein degraders, offering insights on the upcoming trends in the domain.

Chapter 4 includes information on more than 155 targeted protein degraders that are currently being evaluated in different stages of development (both clinical and preclinical / discovery). It features a comprehensive analysis of pipeline molecules, based on their types of protein degraders (degronimids, ENDTACs, epichaperome inhibitors, hydrophobic tags, IMiDs, LYTACs, molecular glues, PHOTACs, PROTACs, protein homeostatic modulators, SARDs, SERDs, SNIPERs, and specific BET and DUB inhibitors), phase of development (clinical, preclinical, and discovery stage) of product candidates, target indications, key therapeutic areas, types of target proteins, target enzymes (if available), target signaling pathways (if available), mechanisms of action (if available), type of therapy (monotherapy and combination therapy), route of administration (oral, intravenous and others), and information on special drug designations (if any). Further, the chapter provides information on drug developer(s), highlighting their year of establishment, location of headquarters and company size.

Chapter 5 provides an overview of the overall landscape of the targeted protein degradation enabling technologies, including an analysis based on type of degrader. In addition, the chapter features a list of technology developers and an analysis based on several parameters, such as such as year of establishment, company size, and location of headquarters.

Chapter 6 features elaborate profiles of prominent players engaged in the development of targeted protein degraders (shortlisted on the basis of phase of development of pipeline products). Each company profile includes a brief overview of the company, its financial information (if available), details on their respective lead drug candidates, recent development and an informed future outlook. Additionally, each drug profile features information on the type of drug, route of administration, target indications, current status of development and a brief summary of its developmental history. Further, the chapter includes tabulated profiles of industry players (shortlisted on the basis of the number of pipeline products), featuring details on the developer (such as year of establishment, location of headquarters, number of employees, and key members of the executive team), recent developments, along with descriptions of their respective drug candidates.

Chapter 7 provides a detailed analysis of completed, ongoing and planned clinical studies of various targeted protein degraders, highlighting prevalent trends across various relevant parameters, such as current trial status, trial registration year, enrolled patient population and regional distribution of trials, type of protein degrader, phase of development, study design, leading industry and non-industry players (in terms of number of trials conducted), study focus, target therapeutic area, key indications, and clinical endpoints.

Chapter 8 provides an analysis of more than 770 grants that were awarded to research institutes engaged in target protein degradation, in the period between 2017 and 2020 based on the important parameters, such as year of award, amount awarded, administering institute center, support period, funding mechanism, type of grant application, purpose of grant award, activity code, emerging focus areas of the grants, study section, popular NIH departments, study section, type of recipient organizations, popular recipient organizations, popular program officers and regional distribution.

Chapter 9 provides information on certain recent publications that we came across during our research on target protein degradation. This chapter highlights the key trends observed across publications, including information on type of publication, year of publication, study objective, popular keywords, type of protein degrader, biological target, associated ubiquitin enzyme, number of publications, type of publisher, leading players (in terms of number of publications), region, and key journals (in terms of number of articles published in this domain and impact factor of the journal).

Chapter 10 provides an in-depth patent analysis to provide an overview of how the industry is evolving from the R&D perspective. For this analysis, we considered those patents that have been filed / granted related to target protein degradation, since 2018, highlighting key trends associated with these patents, across type of patents, publication year, geographical location, type of applicants, issuing authority / patent offices involved, CPC symbols, emerging focus areas, leading players (in terms of number of patents granted / filed in the given time period), patent characteristics and geography. It also includes a detailed patent benchmarking and an insightful valuation analysis.

Chapter 11 provides an analysis of KOLs in the field of targeted protein degradation. It features a comprehensive list of principal investigators / study directors of different clinical trials, along with information related to the affiliated research institutes. The chapter features a schematic representation of a world map, highlighting the geographical locations of eminent scientists / researchers who are engaged in clinical research in this domain. It also presents a comparative analysis, highlighting those KOLs who have relatively more experience in this domain. The (relative) level of expertise of different KOLs defined by other analysts / industry experts were compared to the results obtained using a proprietary scoring criterion, which was based on parameters such as number of publications, number of citations, participation in clinical trials, number of affiliations and strength of professional network (based on information available on ResearchGate).

Chapter 12 features an elaborate discussion and analysis of collaborations and partnerships that have been inked between different players in this market since 2014. It includes a brief description of various types of partnership models (such as research agreements, product / technology licensing agreements, mergers / acquisitions, asset purchase agreements, R&D and commercialization agreements, IP licensing agreements, clinical trial agreements, product development agreements, and others) that have been employed by stakeholders within this domain. It also consists of a schematic representation showcasing the players that have established the maximum number of alliances related to targeted protein degraders. Furthermore, we have provided a world map representation of all the deals inked in this field, highlighting those that have been established within and across different continents.

Chapter 13 provides information on funding instances and investments that have been made within the targeted protein degradation domain. The chapter includes details on the capital (in the form of seed financing, venture capital financing, debt financing, grants, capital raised from IPOs and subsequent offerings) received by companies in the period 2014-2020, highlighting the growing interest of the venture capital community and other strategic investors in this domain.

Chapter 14 features an insightful market forecast analysis, highlighting the likely growth of novel technologies designed for the development of targeted protein degraders till the year 2030, based on licensing deal structures and agreements that are expected to be signed in the foreseen future. In addition, we estimated the likely distribution of the current and forecasted opportunity across (A) different types of protein degraders (degronimids, PROTACs, SARDs / SERDs, Specific BET and DUB Inhibitors, and other inhibitors), (B) therapeutic areas (oncological disorders, neurological disorders, and other therapeutic areas), (C) route of administration (oral route, intravenous route, and other routes), and (D) key geographical regions (North America, Europe and Asia Pacific).

Chapter 15 provides deal structure analysis, highlighting cash flows and net present values of licensor and licensee, taking into consideration multiple likely scenarios of upfront, milestone and royalty payments.

Chapter 16 is a collection of interview transcripts of discussions held with key stakeholders in this market.

Chapter 17 is a summary of the overall report. It presents the key takeaways and offers our independent opinion related to the research and analysis described in the previous chapters.

Chapter 18 is an appendix, which provides tabulated data and numbers for all the figures included in the report.

Chapter 19 is an appendix, which contains the list of companies and organizations.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PREFACE

  • 1.1. Scope of the Report
  • 1.2. Research Methodology
  • 1.3. Key Questions Answered
  • 1.4. Chapter Outlines

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3. INTRODUCTION

  • 3.1. Context and Background
  • 3.2. Protein Homeostasis
  • 3.3. Post Translational Protein Modifications
  • 3.4. Ubiquitin and the Ubiquitin Proteasome System (UPS)
    • 3.4.1. Structure and Functions of Ubiquitin
    • 3.4.2. Overview of the UPS
      • 3.4.2.1. Components of the UPS
      • 3.4.2.2. Ubiquitin-based Protein Degradation Pathway
  • 3.5. Therapeutic Applications of the UPS
  • 3.6. Ubiquitin Enzyme Inhibitors
    • 3.6.1. Advantages and Challenges
  • 3.7. Overview of Targeted Protein Degradation
    • 3.7.1. Historical Development of Protein Degraders
    • 3.7.2. Types of Protein Degraders
      • 3.7.2.1. Proteolysis Targeting Chimeras (PROTACs)
      • 3.7.2.2. Other Chimeric Protein Targeting Molecules
        • 3.7.2.2.1. Endosome Targeting Chimeras (ENDTACs)
        • 3.7.2.2.2. Lysosome Targeting Chimeras (LYTACs)
        • 3.7.2.2.3. Photochemically Targeted Chimeras (PHOTACs)
      • 3.7.2.3. Epichaperome Inhibitors
      • 3.7.2.4. Hydrophobic Tags
      • 3.7.2.5. Immuno-modulatory Imide Drugs (IMiDs)
      • 3.7.2.6. Molecular Glues
      • 3.7.2.7. Protein Homeostatic Modulators
      • 3.7.2.8. Selective Hormone Receptor Degraders (SHRDs)
      • 3.7.2.9. Specific and Non-genetic IAP-dependent Protein Erasers (SNIPERs)
      • 3.7.2.10. Specific Bromodomain and Extra-terminal Motif (BET) Inhibitors and Deubiquitinase (DUB) Inhibitors
  • 3.8. Market Growth Drivers and Roadblocks
  • 3.9. Recent Developments and Upcoming Trends

4. CURRENT MARKET LANDSCAPE: TARGET PROTEIN DEGRADATION-BASED THERAPEUTICS

  • 4.1. Chapter Overview
  • 4.2. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Development Pipeline
    • 4.2.1. Analysis by Type of Protein Degrader
    • 4.2.2. Analysis by Phase of Development
    • 4.2.3. Analysis by Therapeutic Area
    • 4.2.4. Analysis by Target Indication
    • 4.2.5. Analysis by Biological Target
    • 4.2.6. Analysis by Associated Ubiquitin Ligase
    • 4.2.7. Analysis by Type of Therapy
    • 4.2.8. Analysis by Route of Administration
  • 4.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Developer Landscape
    • 4.3.1. Analysis by Year of Establishment
    • 4.3.2. Analysis by Company Size
    • 4.3.3. Analysis by Type of Protein Degrader
    • 4.3.4. Analysis by Location of Headquarters
    • 4.3.5. Leading Players: Analysis by Number of Drug Candidates

5. CURRENT MARKET LANDSCAPE: TARGET PROTEIN DEGRADATION ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES

  • 5.1. Chapter Overview
  • 5.2. Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: List of Research Tools / Key Technology Platforms
    • 5.2.1. Analysis by Type of Protein Degrader
    • 5.2.2. Analysis by Number of Drugs under Development
  • 5.3. Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Developer Landscape
    • 5.3.1. Analysis by Year of Establishment
    • 5.3.2. Analysis by Company Size
    • 5.3.3. Analysis by Location of Headquarters

6. COMPANY PROFILES

  • 6.1. Chapter Overview
  • 6.2. Developers with Late-stage Clinical Candidates
    • 6.2.1. Radius Health
      • 6.2.1.1. Company Overview
      • 6.2.1.2. Financial Information
      • 6.2.1.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Product Portfolio
        • 6.2.1.3.1. Elacestrant (RAD1901)
      • 6.2.1.4. Recent Developments and Future Outlook
    • 6.2.2. Celgene
      • 6.2.2.1. Company Overview
      • 6.2.2.2. Financial Information
      • 6.2.2.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Drug Portfolio
        • 6.2.2.3.1. Avadomide (CC-122)
        • 6.2.2.3.2. Iberdomide (CC-220)
      • 6.2.2.4. Recent Developments and Future Outlook
    • 6.2.3. Sanofi Genzyme
      • 6.2.3.1. Company Overview
      • 6.2.3.2. Financial Information
      • 6.2.3.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Drug Portfolio
        • 6.2.3.3.1. SAR439869
      • 6.2.3.4. Recent Developments and Future Outlook
    • 6.2.4. AstraZeneca
      • 6.2.4.1. Company Overview
      • 6.2.4.2. Financial Information
      • 6.2.4.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Drug Portfolio
        • 6.2.4.3.1. AZD9833
      • 6.2.4.4. Recent Developments and Future Outlook
  • 6.3. Developers with Preclinical / Early-stage Clinical Candidates
    • 6.3.1. Arvinas
    • 6.3.2. BioTheryX
    • 6.3.3. Captor Therapeutics
    • 6.3.4. C4 Therapeutics
    • 6.3.5. Genentech
    • 6.3.6. Hinova Pharmaceuticals
    • 6.3.7. Kangpu Biopharmaceuticals
    • 6.3.8. Kymera Therapeutics
    • 6.3.9. Mission Therapeutics
    • 6.3.10. Progenra
    • 6.3.11. Zenopharm

7. CLINICAL TRIAL ANALYSIS

  • 7.1. Chapter Overview
  • 7.2. Scope and Methodology
  • 7.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: List of Clinical Trials
    • 7.3.1. Analysis by Trial Registration Year
    • 7.3.2. Geographical Analysis by Number of Clinical Trials
    • 7.3.3. Geographical Analysis by Enrolled Patient Population
    • 7.3.4. Analysis by Type of Protein Degrader
    • 7.3.5. Analysis by Trial Phase
    • 7.3.6. Analysis by Study Design
    • 7.3.7. Analysis by Type of Sponsor / Collaborator
    • 7.3.8. Most Active Players: Analysis by Number of Registered Trials
    • 7.3.9. Analysis by Trial Focus
    • 7.3.10. Analysis by Therapeutic Area
    • 7.3.11. Analysis by Clinical Endpoints

8. ACADEMIC GRANTS ANALYSIS

  • 8.1. Chapter Overview
  • 8.2. Scope and Methodology
  • 8.3. Target Protein Degradation: Analysis of Academic Grants
    • 8.3.1. Analysis by Year of Grant Award
    • 8.3.2. Analysis by Amount Awarded
    • 8.3.3. Analysis by Funding Institute Center
    • 8.3.4. Analysis by Support Period
    • 8.3.5. Analysis by Funding Institute Center and Support Period
    • 8.3.6. Analysis by Type of Grant Application
    • 8.3.7. Analysis by Purpose of Grant Award
    • 8.3.8. Analysis by Activity Code
    • 8.3.9. Emerging Focus Areas (Word Cloud)
    • 8.3.10. Analysis by Study Section Involved
    • 8.3.11. Popular NIH Departments: Analysis by Number of Grants
    • 8.3.12. Analysis by Type of Recipient Organization
    • 8.3.13. Prominent Program Officers: Analysis by Number of Grants
    • 8.3.14. Popular Recipient Organizations: Analysis by Number of Grants
    • 8.3.15. Regional Distribution of Recipient Organizations

9. PUBLICATION ANALYSIS

  • 9.1. Chapter Overview
  • 9.2. Scope and Methodology
  • 9.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-Based Therapeutics and Technologies: Recent Publications
    • 9.3.1. Analysis by Year of Publication
    • 9.3.2. Analysis by Study Objective
    • 9.3.3. Emerging Focus Areas
    • 9.3.4. Analysis by Type of Protein Degrader
    • 9.3.5. Analysis by Target Protein
    • 9.3.6. Analysis by Target Enzyme
    • 9.3.7. Analysis by Target Indication
    • 9.3.8. Analysis by Type of Publisher
    • 9.3.9. Leading Players: Analysis by Number of Publications
    • 9.3.10. Leading Players: Geographical Analysis by Number of Publications
    • 9.3.11. Key Journals: Analysis by Number of Publications

10. PATENT ANALYSIS

  • 10.1. Chapter Overview
  • 10.2. Scope and Methodology
  • 10.3. Targeted Protein Degradation Technologies: Patent Analysis
    • 10.3.1. Analysis by Publication Year
    • 10.3.2. Analysis by Application Year
    • 10.3.3. Analysis by Geographical Location
    • 10.3.4. Analysis by CPC Symbols
    • 10.3.5. Emerging Focus Areas (Word Cloud)
    • 10.3.6. Analysis by Type of Organization
    • 10.3.7. Leading Players: Analysis by Number of Patents
  • 10.4. Target Protein Degradation Technologies: Benchmarking Patent Analysis
    • 10.4.1. Analysis by Patent Characteristics
  • 10.5. Target Protein Degradation-based Technologies: Patent Valuation Analysis
  • 10.6. Leading Patents by Number of Citations

11. KOL ANALYSIS

  • 11.1. Chapter Overview
  • 11.2. Scope and Methodology
  • 11.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: List of Principal Investigators
    • 11.3.1. Analysis by Designation
    • 11.3.2. Analysis by Phase of Development and Type of Protein Degrader
    • 11.3.3. Analysis by Therapeutic Area
    • 11.3.4. Analysis by Type of Organization
    • 11.3.5. Analysis by Location of Organization
    • 11.3.6. Leading Organizations: Analysis by Number of Affiliated Principal Investigators
  • 11.4. Prominent Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs)
  • 11.5. KOL Benchmarking: Roots Analysis versus Third Party Scoring (ResearchGate Score)
  • 11.6. Profiles of Most Active KOLs
    • 11.6.1. Profile: KOL A (Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center)
    • 11.6.2. Profile: KOL B (Celgene)
    • 11.6.3. Profile: KOL C (Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University)
    • 11.6.4. Profile: KOL D (Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust)
    • 11.6.5. Profile: KOL E (Samus Therapeutics)
    • 11.6.6. Profile: KOL F (Stanford Women Cancer Center)
    • 11.6.7. Profile: KOL G (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
    • 11.6.8. Profile: KOL H (University of Toledo)

12. PARTNERSHIPS AND COLLABORATIONS

  • 12.1. Chapter Overview
  • 12.2. Partnership Models
  • 12.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: Recent Partnerships and Collaborations
    • 12.3.1. Analysis by Year of Partnership
    • 12.3.2. Analysis by Type of Partnership
    • 12.3.3. Analysis by Type of Protein Degrader
    • 12.3.4. Analysis by Protein Degradation Technology
    • 12.3.5. Analysis by Therapeutic Area
    • 12.3.6. Most Active Players: Analysis by Number of Partnerships
    • 12.3.7. Geographical Analysis
      • 12.3.7.1. Most Active Players: Regional Analysis by Number of Partnerships
      • 12.3.7.2. Intercontinental and Intracontinental Agreements

13. FUNDING AND INVESTMENT ANALYSIS

  • 13.1. Chapter Overview
  • 13.2. Types of Funding
  • 13.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: Recent Funding Instances
    • 13.3.1. Analysis by Year of Investment
    • 13.3.2. Analysis by Amount Invested
    • 13.3.3. Analysis by Type of Funding
    • 13.3.4. Analysis by Amount Invested for Different Types of Degraders
    • 13.3.5. Analysis by Amount Invested across Different Therapeutic Areas
    • 13.3.6. Analysis by Amount Invested across Different Technology Platforms
    • 13.3.7. Most Active Players: Analysis by Number of Funding Instances and Amount Invested
    • 13.3.8. Most Active Investors: Analysis by Participation
    • 13.3.9. Geographical Analysis by Amount Invested
  • 13.4. Concluding Remarks

14. MARKET SIZING AND OPPORTUNITY ANALYSIS

  • 14.1. Chapter Overview
  • 14.2. Assumptions and Methodology
  • 14.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: Information on Licensing Deals
  • 14.4. Overall Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market, 2021-2030
    • 14.4.1. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
      • 14.4.1.1. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Degronimids, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.1.2. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for PROTACs, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.1.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for SARDs / SERDs, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.1.4. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Specific BET and DUB Inhibitors, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.1.5. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Other Inhibitors, 2021-2030
    • 14.4.2. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
      • 14.4.2.1. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Oncological Disorders, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.2.2. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Neurological Disorders, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.2.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Other Therapeutic Areas, 2021-2030
    • 14.4.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Route of Administration
      • 14.4.3.1. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Oral Route, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.3.2. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Intravenous Route, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.3.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Other Routes of Administration, 2021-2030
    • 14.4.4. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Geography
      • 14.4.4.1. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in North America, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.4.2. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in Europe, 2021-2030
      • 14.4.4.3. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in Asia-Pacific, 2021-2030
    • 14.4.5. Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Share of Key Contributing Technologies, 2021-2030

15. LICENSING DEAL STRUCTURE

16. EXECUTIVE INSIGHTS

  • 16.1. Chapter Overview
  • 16.2. Polyprox Therapeutics
    • 16.2.1. Company Snapshot
    • 16.2.2. Interview Transcript: Laura Itzhaki, Founder and Chief Scientific Officer
  • 16.3. Xios Therapeutics
    • 16.3.1. Company Snapshot
    • 16.3.2. Interview Transcript: Louise Bergeron, Vice President
  • 16.4. Almac
    • 16.4.1. Company Snapshot
    • 16.4.2. Interview Transcript: Martin Wiles, Vice President Business Development and Licensing & Gerald Gavory, Director of Biology
  • 16.5. Ubiquigent
    • 16.5.1. Company Snapshot
    • 16.5.2. Interview Transcript: Jason Brown, Scientific and Business Development Director
  • 16.6. Interview Transcript: Anonymous, Director of Oncology Research
  • 16.7. Interview Transcript: Anonymous, Chief Scientific Officer
  • 16.8. Mission Therapeutics
    • 16.8.1. Company Snapshot
    • 16.8.2. Paul Wallace, Chief Business Officer
  • 16.9. Francis Crick Institute
    • 16.9.1. Company Snapshot
    • 16.9.2. Interview Transcript: Katrin Rittinger, Research Group Leader
  • 16.10. University of Delaware
    • 16.10.1. Company Snapshot
    • 16.10.2. Interview Transcript: Zhihao Zhuang, Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry

17. CONCLUDING REMARKS

18. APPENDIX 1: TABULATED DATA

19. APPENDIX 2: LIST OF COMPANIES AND ORGANIZATIONS

List Of Figures

  • Figure 3.1 Important Mechanisms of Protein Surveillance
  • Figure 3.2 Common Types of Post-translational Modifications
  • Figure 3.3 Mechanism-based Analogies in Phosphorylation and Ubiquitination
  • Figure 3.4 Key Differences between Phosphorylation and Ubiquitination
  • Figure 3.5 Ubiquitin: Types of Target Proteins
  • Figure 3.6 Genetic Evolution of the UPS in Eukaryotes
  • Figure 3.7 Key Components of the UPS
  • Figure 3.8 Key Steps Involved in Protein Degradation via the Ubiquitin-Proteasome Pathway
  • Figure 3.9 Different Modes of Ubiquitination
  • Figure 3.10 Biological Functions of Ubiquitination
  • Figure 3.11 Role of UPS in Disease Development Process
  • Figure 3.12 Key Therapeutic Areas Targeted by UPS Modulating Drug Candidates
  • Figure 3.13 Key Differences Between Protein Degrader and Protein Inhibitor
  • Figure 3.14 Historical Evolution of Targeted Protein Degradation
  • Figure 3.15 Types of Protein Degraders
  • Figure 3.16 Mechanism of Action of PROTACs
  • Figure 3.17 Mechanism of Action of ENDTACs
  • Figure 3.18 Mechanism of Action of LYTACs
  • Figure 3.19 Mechanism of Action of PHOTACs
  • Figure 3.20 Mechanism of Action of Epichaperome Inhibitors
  • Figure 3.21 Mechanism of Action of Hydrophobic Tags
  • Figure 3.22 Mechanism of Action of IMiDs
  • Figure 3.23 Mechanism of Action of Molecular Glues
  • Figure 3.24 Mechanism of Action of Protein Homeostatic Modulators
  • Figure 3.25 Mechanism of Action of SHRDs
  • Figure 3.26 Mechanism of Action of SNIPERs
  • Figure 3.27 Key Growth Drivers and Roadblocks Related to Targeted Protein Degraders
  • Figure 4.1 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 4.2 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Phase of Development
  • Figure 4.3 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Phase of Development and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 4.4 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 4.5 Popular Indications: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Figure 4.6 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Therapeutic Area and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 4.7 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Therapeutic Area and Phase of Development
  • Figure 4.8 Popular Biological Target: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Figure 4.9 Popular Associated Ubiquitin Ligase: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Figure 4.10 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Biological Target and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 4.11 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Biological Target and Phase of Development
  • Figure 4.12 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Type of Therapy
  • Figure 4.13 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Route of Administration
  • Figure 4.14 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Year of Establishment
  • Figure 4.15 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Location of Headquarters
  • Figure 4.16 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Company Size
  • Figure 4.17 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 4.18 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Geographical Distribution of Industry Players by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 4.19 Leading Players: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Figure 5.1 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 5.2 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution by Number of Drugs Under Development
  • Figure 5.3 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution of Industry Players by Year of Establishment
  • Figure 5.4 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution of Industry Players by Location of Headquarters
  • Figure 5.5 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution of Industry Players by Company Size
  • Figure 6.1 Celgene: Net Revenues, FY 2014 - Q3 2019 (USD Million)
  • Figure 6.2 Sanofi Genzyme: Net Revenues, FY 2014 - H1 2020 (USD Million)
  • Figure 6.3 AstraZeneca: Net Revenues, FY 2014 - Q3 2020 (USD Billion)
  • Figure 7.1 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Trial Status
  • Figure 7.2 Clinical Trials: Cumulative Distribution by Trial Registration Year, Pre-2012-2021 (till January)
  • Figure 7.3 Clinical Trial Analysis: Geographical Distribution of Trials
  • Figure 7.4 Clinical Trial Analysis: Geographical Distribution of Enrolled Patient Population
  • Figure 7.5 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 7.6 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Trial Phase
  • Figure 7.7 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader and Trial Phase
  • Figure 7.8 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Registration Year, Type of Protein Degrader and Leading Players
  • Figure 7.9 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Target Indication, Type of Protein Degrader, Trial Phase and Trial Registration Year
  • Figure 7.10 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Study Design
  • Figure 7.11 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Type of Sponsor / Collaborator
  • Figure 7.12 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Registered Trials
  • Figure 7.13 Word Cloud: Popular Keywords
  • Figure 7.14 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 7.15 Clinical Trial Analysis: Benchmarking by Number of Trials across Popular Indications
  • Figure 7.16 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Trial Phase and Popular Indications
  • Figure 7.17 Clinical Trial Analysis: Benchmarking of Leading Players by Number of Trials across Key Therapeutic Indications
  • Figure 7.18 Clinical Trials: Most Popular Clinical Endpoints by Phase of Development
  • Figure 8.1 Grant Analysis: Cumulative Trend by Year of Grant Award, 2016-2020
  • Figure 8.2 Grant Analysis: Year-wise Distribution of Grant Amount (USD Million), 2016-2020
  • Figure 8.3 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Funding Institute Center
  • Figure 8.4 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Support Period
  • Figure 8.5 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Funding Institute Center and Support Period
  • Figure 8.6 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Type of Grant Application
  • Figure 8.7 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Purpose of Grant Award
  • Figure 8.8 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Activity Code
  • Figure 8.9 Word Cloud: Emerging Focus Areas
  • Figure 8.10 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Study Section Involved
  • Figure 8.11 Popular NIH Departments: Distribution by Number of Grants
  • Figure 8.12 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Type of Recipient Organization
  • Figure 8.13 Prominent Program Officers: Distribution by Number of Grants
  • Figure 8.14 Popular Recipient Organizations: Distribution by Number of Grants
  • Figure 8.15 Grant Analysis: Regional Distribution of Recipient Organizations
  • Figure 9.1 Recent Publications: Distribution by Type of Publication
  • Figure 9.2 Recent Publications: Cumulative Year-wise Trend, 2017-Q3 2019
  • Figure 9.3 Recent Publications: Distribution by Study Objective
  • Figure 9.4 Recent Publications: Emerging Focus Areas
  • Figure 9.5 Recent Publications: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 9.6 Recent Publications: Distribution by Target Protein
  • Figure 9.7 Recent Publications: Distribution by Target Enzyme
  • Figure 9.8 Popular Target Indications: Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Figure 9.9 Recent Publications: Distribution by Type of Publisher
  • Figure 9.10 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Figure 9.11 Leading Players: Geographical Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Figure 9.12 Key Journals: Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Figure 10.1 Patent Analysis: Distribution by Type of Patent
  • Figure 10.2 Patent Analysis: Cumulative Distribution by Publication Year, 2018-2020
  • Figure 10.3 Patent Analysis: Distribution by Application Year, Pre-2017-2020
  • Figure 10.4 Patent Analysis: Distribution by Geographical Location
  • Figure 10.5 Patent Analysis: Distribution by CPC Symbols
  • Figure 10.6 Patent Analysis: Emerging Focus Areas
  • Figure 10.7 Patent Analysis: Cumulative Year-wise Distribution by Type of Organization
  • Figure 10.8 Patent Analysis: Leading Industry Players
  • Figure 10.9 Patent Analysis: Leading Non-Industry Players
  • Figure 10.10 Patent Analysis: Leading Individual Assignees
  • Figure 10.11 Patent Analysis (Leading Industry Players): Benchmarking by Patent Characteristics (CPC Symbols)
  • Figure 10.12 Patent Analysis: Distribution of Patents by Age (2001-2020)
  • Figure 10.13 Targeted Protein Degradation Technologies: Patent Valuation
  • Figure 11.1 KOLs: Geographical Distribution of Principal Investigators
  • Figure 11.2 KOLs: Distribution by Designation
  • Figure 11.3 KOLs: Distribution by Phase of Development and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 11.4 KOLs: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 11.5 KOLs: Distribution by Type of Organization
  • Figure 11.6 KOLs: Distribution by Location of Organization
  • Figure 11.7 Leading Organizations: Distribution by Number of Affiliated Principal Investigators
  • Figure 11.8 KOLs: Dot-Plot of Principal Investigators
  • Figure 11.9 KOL Benchmarking: Roots Analysis versus Third Party Scoring
  • Figure 11.10 Most Prominent KOLs
  • Figure 12.1 Partnerships and Collaborations: Cumulative Year-wise Trend, 2014-2021 (till January)
  • Figure 12.2 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Type of Partnership
  • Figure 12.3 Partnerships and Collaborations: Year-wise Trend by Type of Partnership
  • Figure 12.4 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 12.5 Partnerships and Collaborations: Year-wise Trend by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Figure 12.6 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader and Type of Partnership
  • Figure 12.7 Popular Technology Platforms: Distribution by Number of Partnerships
  • Figure 12.8 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 12.9 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Therapeutic Area and Type of Partnership
  • Figure 12.10 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Protein Degradation Technology
  • Figure 12.11 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Partnerships
  • Figure 12.12 Most Active Players: Geographical Distribution by Number of Partnerships
  • Figure 12.13 Partnerships and Collaborations: Intercontinental and Intracontinental Distribution
  • Figure 13.1 Funding and Investments: Distribution of Number of Funding Instances by Year of Establishment and Type of Funding, 2014-2020
  • Figure 13.2 Funding and Investments: Cumulative Year-wise Trend, 2014-2020
  • Figure 13.3 Funding and Investments: Cumulative Amount Invested by Year, 2014-2020 (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.4 Funding and Investments: Distribution by Type of Funding
  • Figure 13.5 Funding and Investments: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million) and Type of Funding
  • Figure 13.6 Funding and Investments: Distribution of Amount Invested by Focus Area and Type of Funding
  • Figure 13.7 Funding and Investments: Summary of Investments, 2014-2020 (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.8 Protein Degraders: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Figure 13.9 Protein Degraders: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.10 Funding and Investments: Year-wise Distribution of Amount Invested for Different Protein Degraders, 2014-2020 (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.11 Popular Therapeutic Areas: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Figure 13.12 Popular Therapeutic Areas: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances across Different Protein Degraders
  • Figure 13.13 Popular Therapeutic Areas: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.14 Popular Technology Platforms: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.15 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Figure 13.16 Most Active Players: Distribution by Capital Amount Raised (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.17 Most Active Investors: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Figure 13.18 Funding and Investments: Geographical Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Figure 13.19 Funding and Investment Summary
  • Figure 14.1 Licensing Agreements: Distribution of Financial Components
  • Figure 14.2 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: Information on Licensing Deals
  • Figure 14.3 Overall Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.4 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market by Upfront Payments, till 2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.5 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market by Milestone Payments, till 2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.6 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader, 2021 and 2030
  • Figure 14.7 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Degronimids, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.8 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for PROTACs, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.9 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for SARDs / SERDs, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.10 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Specific BET and DUB Inhibitors, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.11 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Therapeutic Area, 2021 and 2030
  • Figure 14.12 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Oncological Disorders, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.13 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Neurological Disorders, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.14 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Other Therapeutic Areas, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.15 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Route of Administration, 2021 and 2030
  • Figure 14.16 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Oral Route, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.17 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Intravenous Route, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.18 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Other Routes of Administration, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.19 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Regional Distribution, 2021 and 2030
  • Figure 14.20 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in North America, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.21 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in Europe, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.22 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in Asia-Pacific, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 14.23 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Key Contributing Technologies, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Figure 17.1 Concluding Remarks: Current Market Landscape
  • Figure 17.2 Concluding Remarks: Clinical Trial Analysis
  • Figure 17.3 Concluding Remarks: Academic Grant Analysis
  • Figure 17.4 Concluding Remarks: Publication Analysis
  • Figure 17.5 Concluding Remarks: Patent Analysis
  • Figure 17.6 Concluding Remarks: Partnerships and Collaborations
  • Figure 17.7 Concluding Remarks: Funding Analysis
  • Figure 17.8 Concluding Remarks: Market Sizing and Opportunity Analysis

List Of Tables

  • Table 3.1 Structural Classification of Ubiquitin
  • Table 4.1 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Development Pipeline
  • Table 4.2 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Information on Therapeutic Area and Phase of Development
  • Table 4.3 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Information on Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 4.3 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Information on Target Enzyme, Target Protein, Signaling Pathway, Type of Therapy and Route of Administration
  • Table 4.4 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Information on Marketed First Generation Protein Degraders
  • Table 4.5 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Developer Landscape
  • Table 5.1 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Information on Research Tools / Key Technology Platforms
  • Table 5.2 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Developer Landscape
  • Table 6.1 Radius Health: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.2 Drug Profile: Elacestrant (RAD1901)
  • Table 6.3 Radius Health: Recent Developments and Future Outlook
  • Table 6.4 Celgene: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.5 Drug Profile: Avadomide (CC-122)
  • Table 6.6 Drug Profile: Iberdomide (CC-220)
  • Table 6.7 Celgene: Recent Developments and Future Outlook
  • Table 6.8 Sanofi Genzyme: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.9 Drug profile: SAR439869
  • Table 6.10 Sanofi Genzyme: Recent Developments and Future Outlook
  • Table 6.11 AstraZeneca: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.12 Drug profile: AZD9833
  • Table 6.13 AstraZeneca: Recent Developments and Future Outlook
  • Table 6.14 Arvinas: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.15 BioTheryX: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.16 Captor Therapeutics: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.17 C4 Therapeutics: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.18 Genentech: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.19 Hinova Pharmaceuticals: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.20 Kangpu Biopharmaceuticals: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.21 Kymera Therapeutics: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.22 Mission Therapeutics: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.23 Progenra: Key Highlights
  • Table 6.24 Zenopharm: Key Highlights
  • Table 9.1 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: List of Recent Publications, 2017 - Q3 2019
  • Table 11.1 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: List of Principal Investigators
  • Table 11.2 KOLs: Roots Analysis Proprietary Scoring System
  • Table 11.3 Profile: KOL A (Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center)
  • Table 11.4 Profile: KOL B (Celgene)
  • Table 11.5 Profile: KOL C (Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University)
  • Table 11.6 Profile: KOL D (Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust)
  • Table 11.7 Profile: KOL E (Samus Therapeutics)
  • Table 11.8 Profile: KOL F (Stanford Women Cancer Center)
  • Table 11.9 Profile: KOL G (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
  • Table 11.10 Profile: KOL H (University of Toledo)
  • Table 12.1 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: List of Partnerships, 2014-2021 (till January)
  • Table 13.1 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: List of Funding Instances, 2014-2020
  • Table 13.2 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies: Summary of Investments
  • Table 16.1 Polyprox Therapeutics: Company Snapshot
  • Table 16.2 Xios Therapeutics: Company Snapshot
  • Table 16.3 Almac: Company Snapshot
  • Table 16.4 Ubiquigent: Company Snapshot
  • Table 16.5 Mission Therapeutics: Company Snapshot
  • Table 16.5 Francis Crick Institute: Company Snapshot
  • Table 16.6 University of Delaware: Company Snapshot
  • Table 17.1 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.2 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Phase of Development
  • Table 17.3 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Phase of Development and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.4 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Table 17.5 Popular Indications: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Table 17.6 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Therapeutic Area and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.7 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Therapeutic Area and Phase of Development
  • Table 17.8 Popular Biological Target: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Table 17.9 Popular Associated Ubiquitin Ligase: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Table 17.10 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Biological Target and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.11 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Biological Target and Phase of Development
  • Table 17.12 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Type of Therapy
  • Table 17.13 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution by Route of Administration
  • Table 17.14 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Year of Establishment
  • Table 17.15 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Location of Headquarters
  • Table 17.16 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Company Size
  • Table 17.17 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Distribution of Industry Players by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.18 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics: Geographical Distribution of Industry Players by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.19 Leading Players: Distribution by Number of Drug Candidates
  • Table 17.20 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.21 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution by Number of Drugs Under Development
  • Table 17.22 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution of Industry Players by Year of Establishment
  • Table 17.23 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution of Industry Players by Location of Headquarters
  • Table 17.24 Targeted Protein Degradation Enabling Technologies: Distribution of Industry Players by Company Size
  • Table 17.25 Celgene: Net Revenues, FY 2014 - Q3 2019 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.26 Sanofi Genzyme: Net Revenues, FY 2014 - H1 2020 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.27 AstraZeneca: Net Revenues, FY 2014 - Q3 2020 (USD Billion)
  • Table 17.28 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Trial Status
  • Table 17.29 Clinical Trial Analysis: Cumulative Distribution by Trial Registration Year, Pre-2012-2021 (till January)
  • Table 17.30 Clinical Trial Analysis: Geographical Distribution of Trials
  • Table 17.31 Clinical Trial Analysis: Geographical Distribution of Enrolled Patient Population
  • Table 17.32 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.33 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Trial Phase
  • Table 17.34 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader and Trial Phase
  • Table 17.35 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Registration Year, Type of Protein Degrader and Leading Players
  • Table 17.36 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Target Indication, Type of Protein Degrader, Trial Phase and Trial Registration Year
  • Table 17.37 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Study Design
  • Table 17.38 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Type of Sponsor / Collaborator
  • Table 17.39 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Registered Trials
  • Table 17.40 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Table 17.41 Clinical Trial Analysis: Benchmarking by Number of Trials across Popular Indications
  • Table 17.42 Clinical Trial Analysis: Distribution by Trial Phase and Popular Indications
  • Table 17.43 Clinical Trial Analysis: Benchmarking of Leading Players by Number of Trials across Key Therapeutic Indications
  • Table 17.44 Clinical Trials: Most Popular Clinical Endpoints by Phase of Development
  • Table 17.45 Grant Analysis: Cumulative Trend by Year of Grant Award, 2017-2020
  • Table 17.46 Grant Analysis: Year-wise Distribution of Grant Amount (USD Million), 2017-2020
  • Table 17.47 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Funding Institute Center
  • Table 17.48 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Support Period
  • Table 17.49 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Funding Institute Center and Support Period
  • Table 17.50 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Type of Grant Application
  • Table 17.51 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Purpose of Grant Award
  • Table 17.52 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Activity Code
  • Table 17.53 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Study Section Involved
  • Table 17.54 Popular NIH Departments: Distribution by Number of Grants
  • Table 17.55 Grant Analysis: Distribution by Type of Recipient Organization
  • Table 17.56 Prominent Program Officers: Distribution by Number of Grants
  • Table 17.57 Popular Recipient Organizations: Distribution by Number of Grants
  • Table 17.58 Grant Analysis: Regional Distribution of Recipient Organizations
  • Table 17.59 Recent Publications: Distribution by Type of Publication
  • Table 17.60 Recent Publications: Cumulative Year-wise Trend, 2017-Q3 2019
  • Table 17.61 Recent Publications: Distribution by Study Objective
  • Table 17.62 Recent Publications: Emerging Focus Areas
  • Table 17.63 Recent Publications: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.64 Recent Publications: Distribution by Target Protein
  • Table 17.65 Recent Publications: Distribution by Target Enzyme
  • Table 17.66 Popular Target Indications: Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Table 17.67 Recent Publications: Distribution by Type of Publisher
  • Table 17.68 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Table 17.69 Leading Players: Geographical Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Table 17.70 Key Journals: Distribution by Number of Publications
  • Table 17.71 Patent Analysis: Distribution by Type of Patent
  • Table 17.72 Patent Analysis: Cumulative Distribution by Publication Year, 2018-2020
  • Table 17.73 Patent Analysis: Distribution by Application Year, Pre-2017-2020
  • Table 17.74 Patent Analysis: Distribution by Geographical Location
  • Table 17.75 Patent Analysis: Distribution by CPC Symbols
  • Table 17.76 Patent Analysis: Cumulative Year-wise Distribution by Type of Organization
  • Table 17.77 Patent Analysis: Leading Industry Players
  • Table 17.78 Patent Analysis: Leading Non-Industry Players
  • Table 17.79 Patent Analysis: Leading Individual Assignees
  • Table 17.80 Patent Analysis (Leading Industry Players): Benchmarking by Patent Characteristics (CPC Symbols)
  • Table 17.81 Patent Analysis: Distribution of Patents by Age (2001-2020)
  • Table 17.82 Targeted Protein Degradation Technologies: Patent Valuation
  • Table 17.83 KOLs: Geographical Distribution of Principal Investigators
  • Table 17.84 KOLs: Distribution by Designation
  • Table 17.85 KOLs: Distribution by Phase of Development and Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.86 KOLs: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Table 17.87 KOLs: Distribution by Type of Organization
  • Table 17.88 KOLs: Distribution by Location of Organization
  • Table 17.89 Leading Organizations: Distribution by Number of Affiliated Principal Investigators
  • Table 17.90 KOLs: Dot-Plot of Principal Investigators
  • Table 17.91 KOL Benchmarking: Roots Analysis versus Third Party Scoring
  • Table 17.92 Most Prominent KOLs
  • Table 17.93 Partnerships and Collaborations: Cumulative Year-wise Trend, 2014-2021 (till January)
  • Table 17.94 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Type of Partnership
  • Table 17.95 Partnerships and Collaborations: Year-wise Trend by Type of Partnership
  • Table 17.96 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.97 Partnerships and Collaborations: Year-wise Trend by Type of Protein Degrader
  • Table 17.98 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader and Type of Partnership
  • Table 17.99 Popular Technology Platforms: Distribution by Number of Partnerships
  • Table 17.100 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Therapeutic Area
  • Table 17.101 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Therapeutic Area and Type of Partnership
  • Table 17.102 Partnerships and Collaborations: Distribution by Protein Degradation Technology
  • Table 17.103 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Partnerships
  • Table 17.104 Most Active Players: Geographical Distribution by Number of Partnerships
  • Table 17.105 Partnerships and Collaborations: Intercontinental and Intracontinental Distribution
  • Table 17.106 Funding and Investments: Distribution by Year of Establishment and Type of Funding, 2014-2020
  • Table 17.107 Funding and Investments: Cumulative Year-wise Trend, 2014-2020
  • Table 17.108 Funding and Investments: Cumulative Amount Invested by Year, 2014-2020 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.109 Funding and Investments: Distribution by Type of Funding
  • Table 17.110 Funding and Investments: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million) and Type of Funding
  • Table 17.111 Funding and Investments: Distribution of Amount Invested by Focus Area and Type of Funding
  • Table 17.112 Funding and Investments: Summary of Investments, 2014-2020 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.113 Protein Degraders: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Table 17.114 Protein Degraders: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Table 17.115 Funding and Investments: Year-wise Distribution of Amount Invested for Different Protein Degraders, 2014-2020 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.116 Popular Therapeutic Areas: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Table 17.117 Popular Therapeutic Areas: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances across Different Protein Degraders
  • Table 17.118 Popular Therapeutic Areas: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Table 17.119 Popular Technology Platforms: Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Table 17.120 Most Active Players: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Table 17.121 Most Active Players: Distribution by Capital Amount Raised (USD Million)
  • Table 17.122 Most Active Investors: Distribution by Number of Funding Instances
  • Table 17.123 Funding and Investments: Geographical Distribution by Amount Invested (USD Million)
  • Table 17.124 Overall Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.125 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market by Upfront Payments, till 2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.126 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market by Milestone Payments, till 2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.127 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Type of Protein Degrader, 2021 and 2030
  • Table 17.128 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Degronimids, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.129 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for PROTACs, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.130 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for SARDs / SERDs, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.131 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Specific BET and DUB Inhibitors, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.132 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Therapeutic Area, 2021 and 2030
  • Table 17.133 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Oncological Disorders, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.134 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Neurological Disorders, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.135 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Other Therapeutic Areas, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.136 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Distribution by Route of Administration, 2021 and 2030
  • Table 17.137 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Oral Route, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.138 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Intravenous Route, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.139 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market for Other Routes of Administration, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.140 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market: Regional Distribution, 2021 and 2030
  • Table 17.141 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in North America, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.142 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in Europe, 2021-2030 (USD Million)
  • Table 17.143 Targeted Protein Degradation-based Therapeutics and Technologies Market in Asia-Pacific, 2021-2030 (USD Million)

List Of Companies

The following companies / organizations have been mentioned in this report.

  • 1. 6 Dimensions Capital
  • 2. AbbVie
  • 3. Abingworth
  • 4. Advantech Capital
  • 5. Advent Life Sciences
  • 6. AIHC Capital
  • 7. Aisling Capital
  • 8. AJU IB Investment
  • 9. Alexandria Venture Investments
  • 10. Alfred Berg
  • 11. Almac Discovery
  • 12. Alpha Stem Cell Clinic
  • 13. Altitude Life Science Ventures
  • 14. AM Capital
  • 15. Amgen
  • 16. Amgen Ventures
  • 17. Amphista Therapeutics
  • 18. Amzak Health
  • 19. ARCH Venture Partners
  • 20. Arpeggio Biosciences
  • 21. Arvinas
  • 22. AstraZeneca
  • 23. Atlas Venture
  • 24. Avista Pharma Solutions
  • 25. Bain Capital Life Sciences
  • 26. Bayer
  • 27. Beactica
  • 28. BeiGene
  • 29. Bellco Capital
  • 30. Bessemer Venture Partners
  • 31. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
  • 32. BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals
  • 33. Biogen
  • 34. BioMotiv
  • 35. BioRap Technologies
  • 36. Biotech Investment Fund
  • 37. BioTheryX
  • 38. BlackRock
  • 39. Boehringer Ingelheim
  • 40. Borun Investment
  • 41. Brigham And Women's Hospital
  • 42. Bristol Myers Squibb
  • 43. BVF Partners
  • 44. C4 Therapeutics
  • 45. Calico
  • 46. California Institute for Regenerative Medicine
  • 47. Cambridge Enterprise
  • 48. Cambridge Innovation Capital
  • 49. Cambridge Stem Cell Institute
  • 50. Cancer Prevention & Research Institute of Texas
  • 51. Cancer Research Technology
  • 52. Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute
  • 53. Capital Pathology Bega
  • 54. Captor Therapeutics
  • 55. Cardinal Partners
  • 56. Carmot Therapeutics
  • 57. Casdin Capital
  • 58. CCB Medical Devices
  • 59. Cedilla Therapeutics
  • 60. Celgene
  • 61. CellCentric
  • 62. Centre for Clinical Hematology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital
  • 63. Chengdu Dingjian
  • 64. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania
  • 65. China Construction Bank
  • 66. Chugai Pharmaceuticals
  • 67. ClinAssess
  • 68. CMB International Capital
  • 69. Cobro Ventures
  • 70. Cormorant Asset Management
  • 71. Cosmo Bio
  • 72. Covance
  • 73. Cowen
  • 74. Cowen Private Investments
  • 75. Crede Capital Group
  • 76. Cullgen
  • 77. CVC Capital Partners
  • 78. Cyclofluidic
  • 79. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
  • 80. DCVC
  • 81. Deerfield Management
  • 82. Dialectic Therapeutics
  • 83. DMS Group
  • 84. Dorian Therapeutics
  • 85. DROIA Ventures
  • 86. Duke University
  • 87. Dyee Capital
  • 88. E Fund Management
  • 89. EcoR1 Capital
  • 90. EG Capital
  • 91. Eisai
  • 92. Elan Science One
  • 93. Eli Lilly
  • 94. Emeriti Bio
  • 95. EMN Research Italy
  • 96. Eriksam Invest Aktiebolag
  • 97. Eshelman Ventures
  • 98. Eternal Thrive
  • 99. European Investment Fund
  • 100. European Myeloma Network
  • 101. European Regional Development Fund
  • 102. Eventide Asset Management
  • 103. Evotec
  • 104. Farallon Capital Management
  • 105. Fidelity Biosciences
  • 106. FIMECS
  • 107. Five Elements Bio-technology
  • 108. Fjärde AP-fonden
  • 109. Foresite Capital
  • 110. FORMA Therapeutics
  • 111. Fosun
  • 112. Franklin Templeton Investments
  • 113. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
  • 114. Frontier Medicines
  • 115. G1 Therapeutics
  • 116. Genentech
  • 117. GF Xinde Investment Management
  • 118. Gilead Sciences
  • 119. GL Ventures
  • 120. Gladiator
  • 121. GlaxoSmithKline
  • 122. GMIHO Medizinische Innovation -Hämatologie und Onkologie
  • 123. GNI Group
  • 124. GV
  • 125. GVK Biosciences
  • 126. H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute
  • 127. Haisco Pharmaceutical
  • 128. Handelsbanken Fonder
  • 129. Harvard Medical School
  • 130. Hatteras Venture Partners
  • 131. HBM Healthcare Investments
  • 132. Healt Data Specialists
  • 133. HealthCap
  • 134. HealthCare Ventures
  • 135. Hermed Alpha
  • 136. HighLight Capital
  • 137. Hinova Pharmaceuticals
  • 138. HitGen
  • 139. Honghui Capital
  • 140. Horizon Discovery
  • 141. Horizons Venture
  • 142. Huarong Rongde Asset Management
  • 143. Hybrigenics Pharma
  • 144. IGM Biosciences
  • 145. ImmunoLogik
  • 146. Imperial Innovations
  • 147. INIM Pharma
  • 148. Innovate UK
  • 149. Institute of Cancer And Genomic Science
  • 150. Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences
  • 151. InventisBio
  • 152. Invus
  • 153. IP Group
  • 154. Janchor Partners
  • 155. Janpix
  • 156. Janssen Research & Development
  • 157. Janus Henderson Investors
  • 158. Jiangsu HengRui Medicine
  • 159. Kai Kuang Pharmaceutical
  • 160. Kangpu Biopharmaceuticals
  • 161. Kronos Bio
  • 162. Kymera Therapeutics
  • 163. Kyoto University Innovation Capital
  • 164. Lang Sheng Investment Group
  • 165. Legend Biotech
  • 166. Lenovo Star
  • 167. LifeArc
  • 168. Lilly Asia Ventures
  • 169. Lilly Ventures
  • 170. Longwood Fund
  • 171. Loxo Oncology
  • 172. Lumira Capital
  • 173. Lycia Therapeutics
  • 174. M Ventures
  • 175. M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
  • 176. Macroceutics
  • 177. Massachusetts General Hospital
  • 178. Matrix Capital
  • 179. Matrix Partner China
  • 180. McGill University
  • 181. MD Anderson Cancer Center
  • 182. MedImmune Ventures
  • 183. Medivir
  • 184. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
  • 185. Menarini Group
  • 186. Merck
  • 187. Mirae Asset Capital
  • 188. Mission Therapeutics
  • 189. Monte Rosa Therapeutics
  • 190. Moonstone Investments
  • 191. Morningside Venture Investments
  • 192. Mount Sinai Hospital's Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
  • 193. Mountain Group Partners
  • 194. MPM Capital
  • 195. MRL Ventures Fund
  • 196. Mubadala Ventures
  • 197. Nanjing General Hospital of People's Liberation Army
  • 198. Nanologica
  • 199. National Cancer Institute
  • 200. National Centre for Research and Development
  • 201. National Institute of Genetics
  • 202. National Institute of Health
  • 203. Neotribe Ventures
  • 204. New Enterprise Associates
  • 205. Nextech Invest
  • 206. Nordic Cross
  • 207. Novartis
  • 208. Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research
  • 209. Novartis Venture Fund
  • 210. Nuevolution
  • 211. Nurix Therapeutics
  • 212. Nyenburgh Investment Partners
  • 213. Oerth Bio
  • 214. Ohio State University
  • 215. Omega Funds
  • 216. Oncternal Therapeutics
  • 217. OrbiMed
  • 218. Oriental Securities Capital
  • 219. Orionis Biosciences
  • 220. Oxford Finance
  • 221. Parexel
  • 222. Penn Medicine Abramson Cancer Center
  • 223. Perceptive Advisors
  • 224. Pfizer
  • 225. Pfizer Ventures
  • 226. Pin Therapeutics
  • 227. Plexium
  • 228. Polaris Partners
  • 229. PolyProx Therapeutics
  • 230. Profacgen
  • 231. Progenra
  • 232. Promega
  • 233. Prostate Cancer Foundation
  • 234. Proteostasis Therapeutics
  • 235. Providence Investment
  • 236. Proxygen
  • 237. Pudong Innotek
  • 238. Qiming Venture Partners
  • 239. Queen's University
  • 240. Quotient Sciences
  • 241. RA Capital
  • 242. Radius Health
  • 243. Redmile Group
  • 244. Roche
  • 245. Roche Venture Fund
  • 246. Rock Springs Capital
  • 247. Rockefeller University
  • 248. Roivant Sciences
  • 249. Roswell Park Cancer Institute
  • 250. RT Capital
  • 251. Samus Therapeutics
  • 252. Sanofi Genzyme
  • 253. Sanofi Ventures
  • 254. Schroder Adveq
  • 255. Scottish Investment Bank
  • 256. Seed Therapeutics
  • 257. Sequoia Capital China
  • 258. Seragon Pharmaceuticals
  • 259. Servier
  • 260. Shanghai Free Trade Zoon Equity Fund
  • 261. Shanghai Furong Investment
  • 262. Shenzhen Guozhong Venture Capital
  • 263. Shenzhen Investment Holdings
  • 264. Shenzhen Sangel Zhichuang Investment
  • 265. SinoPharm Capital
  • 266. Sitryx Therapeutics
  • 267. SK Holdings
  • 268. Sofinnova Partners
  • 269. Solar Capital
  • 270. Songhe Capital
  • 271. Sosei Heptares
  • 272. SR One
  • 273. St. Antonius Hospital
  • 274. Stanford University
  • 275. Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company
  • 276. Surveyor Capital
  • 277. Suzhou Pioneer Pharmaceutical
  • 278. SV Health Investors
  • 279. SV Torch
  • 280. Swedbank Robur
  • 281. Sygnature Discovery
  • 282. Takeda Pharmaceutical
  • 283. Tavistock Life Sciences
  • 284. Tavros Therapeutics
  • 285. Tetralogic Pharmaceuticals
  • 286. The Chinese University of Hong Kong
  • 287. The Column Group
  • 288. The Institute of Cancer Research
  • 289. The Kraft Group
  • 290. The Michael J. Fox Foundation
  • 291. The Netherlands Cancer Institute
  • 292. The Silverstein Foundation for Parkinson's with GBA
  • 293. Third Rock Ventures
  • 294. Tigermed
  • 295. Tokalas
  • 296. Trilo Therapeutics
  • 297. Trinitas Capital
  • 298. Tybourne Capital Management
  • 299. UbiQ Bio
  • 300. Ubiquigent
  • 301. Ubix Therapeutics
  • 302. UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center
  • 303. Unionen
  • 304. University Health Network
  • 305. University Hospital Erlangen
  • 306. University Hospital of Würzburg
  • 307. University of California, Berkeley
  • 308. University of California, San Francisco
  • 309. University of Dundee
  • 310. University of Florida
  • 311. University of Illinois
  • 312. University of Liverpool
  • 313. University of Maryland, Baltimore
  • 314. University of Michigan
  • 315. University of Oxford
  • 316. University of Southern Denmark
  • 317. University of Tennessee Research Foundation
  • 318. University of Washington
  • 319. Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons
  • 320. Versant Ventures
  • 321. Vertex Pharmaceuticals
  • 322. Vicore Pharma
  • 323. Vida Ventures
  • 324. Viking Global Investors
  • 325. Vividion Therapeutics
  • 326. VU University Medical Center
  • 327. Washington University School of Medicine
  • 328. Weill Medical College of Cornell University
  • 329. Wellington Management
  • 330. Woodford Patient Capital Trust
  • 331. Wroclaw Research Centre EIT+
  • 332. X-Chem
  • 333. Xios Therapeutics
  • 334. Yale University
  • 335. Yissum
  • 336. Yuanhe Holdings
  • 337. Yuansheng Venture Capital
  • 338. Zenopharm
  • 339. Zentalis Pharmaceuticals
  • 340. Zentera
  • 341. Zhuhai Huajin Capital