Venture capitalist Kate Bingham, who was tasked in Britain with finding a COVID-19 vaccine, has said that it was an uphill battle, in that 90% of drugs developed with the support of biotech venture-capital (VC) funds fail.

“We know most of what we do is likely not to work, and therefore we need to absolutely double down on those ones we think can work,” she told the Reuters Next online webinar (1 December).

Bingham said that VC was “skilled risk-taking” with a partnership approach and rapid execution – and swift cutting of losses if results were not good.

“I wasn’t given a free rein. All funding decisions were made by ministers,” Bingham explained, including spending decisions on actual vaccines.

Decisions were made by a ministerial investment committee of minsters from the Cabinet Office, Treasury, Health and Business ministries.

“I think it worked pretty well because they realised that the cost of closing the economy was vastly higher than the cost to be paid up front for vaccines,” she said.

In 2020, the up-front costs were £900 million, for manufacturing and clinical development of vaccines.

“Our goal was very much about speed, and how could we get vaccines to the most vulnerable as soon as possible,” she added.

Speed was a massive focus, and the average cost per vaccine was a little over Stg £10 a dose, she said.

She said that there needed to be more scientific expertise in government that could help prepare for another pandemic, pointing to chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance who is a physician and academic, and who ran research and development at pharmaceutical giant, GSK.

“I would like lots of people like him, who understand what it takes to develop, manufacture, and launch products or vaccines,” she said. 

Therapeutics is also part of the toolbox, to treat those people who are infected, she added.

More private-sector experience at a senior level is needed in Government, as well as collaboration between industry, academia and the state.

Arch-rivals

“Arch-rivals collaborating with each other, manufacturing each other’s vaccines, and working in a coherent way, was just incredibly positive,” she said. 

“It’s very difficult to do that if you’re not part of the industry,” she added.

Bingham said she was able to bring her Rolodex and network to the process. 

“I would like to see embedded, networked, experienced, senior, credible people within government who can both put the plans together, but also make sure they stay current,” she said.

Vaccine technology has also improved vastly in recent years, which is why it ended up being so much more successful than with SARS and MERS ten years ago, she said.

“If you are not part of industry, and you don't know how much it's improved, you won't benefit from those big technological improvements that will continue to take place,” she said.

However, it would be too difficult to have an active person in industry in Government, so they would need to either be seconded, or have left the business, she added.

She said that she expected data within a week as to whether the vaccines would work on the Omicron variant.

“At the moment, I would still assume that these vaccines will have efficacy,” she said.

On vaccine hesitancy, Bingham said that it was very difficult to force people to take a shot that they were worried about, but if an alternative vaccine which was of less potential concern could be developed, then that would be a good thing.

Hesitancy should be recognised and not dismissed, because it is entirely legitimate that people should be concerned about new products, Bingham said.

Safety testing 

“If you are in the flow, you realise that no aspect of safety testing has been curtailed.

“So, in many ways, it's not about just continuing to tell people ‘you're crazy’ – it is to recognise that there are legitimate concerns, and to basically make sure they have access to the information that allows them to make their own risk-benefit decision,” she said.

It was more beneficial to be vaccinated and not to get the virus, Bingham said, since ‘long COVID’ was a material risk to young people. .

The public should have information from a source that they trust, she added, whether that came from community or religious leaders.