Skip to main content

Case Studies

Real Programs, Real Results

Emerging biopharma accounts for more than 50% of all new drug launches. These teams need strategic clarity more than anyone. Below are anonymized examples of how we help biotech teams navigate from concept to regulatory milestones. Every engagement is different. These illustrate our approach.

Strategy + Regulatory

Early-Stage Oncology Biotech: Discovery to IND in 18 Months

The Challenge

A seed-funded oncology startup had promising preclinical data but no regulatory strategy, no Target Product Profile, and no clear development timeline. Their investors required a credible development plan before committing the next round of funding.

Our Approach

  • Mapped the competitive landscape across approved and pipeline oncology assets to identify evidence gaps and differentiation opportunities
  • Built a comprehensive Target Product Profile defining efficacy endpoints, safety thresholds, and label claims with explicit go/no-go criteria
  • Designed the optimal FDA regulatory pathway, including an orphan drug designation strategy
  • Prepared pre-IND briefing materials and mock Q&A sessions for regulatory readiness
  • Created a phase-gated development roadmap with decision criteria at each stage

Results

18 mo

Discovery to IND filing

Series A

Funding secured post-strategy

0

Clinical holds from FDA

3 mo

Ahead of projected timeline

Reflection

This program reminded me why clarity matters more than speed. The team had brilliant science, but no shared definition of what success looked like. Once we built the TPP together and forced explicit choices on endpoints and patient population, every subsequent decision fell into place. The investors did not fund the molecule. They funded the roadmap.

TPP + Strategy

Academic Spinout: From University Lab to Funded Development Program

The Challenge

A university research group in Germany had developed a novel drug delivery platform with strong preclinical evidence. They needed to translate academic research into a commercially viable development plan to attract venture funding and form a spinout company.

Our Approach

  • Translated academic research into a Target Product Profile structured for investor clarity
  • Identified the strongest lead indication based on unmet need, regulatory feasibility, and competitive positioning
  • Developed a dual FDA/EMA regulatory strategy leveraging proximity to European regulatory authorities
  • Created a realistic budget framework and development roadmap from seed through Series A
  • Prepared investor-ready materials including a development strategy summary and risk navigation plan

Results

Seed round

Funding secured

2

Viable indications identified

1

Strong lead indication selected

12 mo

To EMA Scientific Advice meeting

Reflection

Academic founders know the science better than anyone, but the journey from lab to clinic requires a different kind of evidence. This team needed to tell a regulatory and commercial story, not just a scientific one. We closed that gap by building a development roadmap that spoke the language investors and regulators expect. Watching them secure funding and move toward their first regulatory interaction was deeply satisfying.

Regulatory Strategy

Rare Disease Program: Dual FDA/EMA Filing Strategy

The Challenge

A biotech developing a therapy for a rare pediatric disease needed to file in both the US and Europe simultaneously. The team had no prior regulatory experience in either jurisdiction and faced a tight timeline driven by patient advocacy group expectations.

Our Approach

  • Mapped regulatory requirements for FDA and EMA side by side, identifying overlapping and jurisdiction-specific evidence needs
  • Designed a unified clinical development program that satisfied both agencies without duplicative studies
  • Prepared the company for an FDA Type B Pre-IND meeting and EMA Scientific Advice meeting within the same quarter
  • Developed orphan drug designation applications for both jurisdictions
  • Created a regulatory submission roadmap with critical milestones, resource requirements, and go/no-go decision points

Results

2

Orphan designations granted

40%

Fewer duplicative studies

6 mo

Saved on parallel filing preparation

100%

Regulatory milestones met on schedule

Reflection

Dual-jurisdiction filings terrify small teams, and for good reason. The complexity is real. But complexity is not the same as impossibility. The key choice here was designing one clinical development program that served both FDA and EMA, rather than running parallel tracks. That single decision saved months of execution time and eliminated redundant studies. Strategic clarity at the front end creates efficiency everywhere downstream.

Strategy + Platform

Infectious Disease Platform: Building a Multi-Indication Development Engine

The Challenge

A Series A infectious disease biotech had a powerful platform technology but lacked a coherent strategy for which indications to pursue first. The team had identified 12 potential applications and was attempting to pursue all of them. Internal misalignment was costing time and capital.

Our Approach

  • Conducted market sizing and regulatory analysis across all 12 indications to identify addressable opportunity and pathway complexity
  • Defined a Platform Target Profile capturing the desired characteristics of the technology engine itself
  • Prioritized indications using a multi-factor scoring model: unmet need, regulatory pathway clarity, manufacturing feasibility, and capital efficiency
  • Built TPPs for the three lead indications, each with distinct regulatory strategies and clinical endpoints
  • Created a platform-level development roadmap showing how early learning from indication 1 informs decisions in indications 2 and 3
  • Designed go/no-go decision criteria for advancing between indications to preserve capital and focus

Results

3

Prioritized lead indications from 12 candidates

35%

Faster advancement to IND (early indication data sharing)

$8M

Capital preserved through focused strategy

18 mo

First three INDs filed in parallel

Reflection

Platform companies sit at a unique crossroads: they own powerful technology but face paralyzing choice about where to apply it. This team wanted to pursue everything because they could. I had to help them see that choosing three indications well beats pursuing twelve indications poorly. The turning point came when we modeled how clinical data from the first indication could derisk the second. That realization transformed the conversation from "which indication do we do?" to "in what order do we do them to minimize risk?" They shipped faster and raised more capital.

TPP + Regulatory

Vaccine Development: Navigating Accelerated Regulatory Pathways

The Challenge

A biotech developing a vaccine for an emerging infectious threat needed to navigate the FDA's accelerated development programs (Breakthrough Designation, Fast Track, Priority Review). The company was approaching regulators for the first time and lacked experience with expedited pathway eligibility criteria.

Our Approach

  • Assessed vaccine candidate eligibility against FDA criteria for Breakthrough Designation and Fast Track programs
  • Built a Target Product Profile that explicitly addressed regulatory decision-making points expected by FDA reviewers
  • Designed a clinical development program that fulfilled both accelerated pathway requirements and strong scientific evidence generation
  • Prepared comprehensive pre-IND meeting materials demonstrating program feasibility, safety monitoring, and regulatory engagement strategy
  • Created a strategic engagement plan with FDA including timing of meetings, discussion topics, and anticipated decision points
  • Developed contingency pathways in case accelerated designation was not granted

Results

Breakthrough

Designation granted post-IND

Fast Track

Priority Review pathway approved

50%

Reduced Phase II development timeline

6 mo

Earlier interaction with FDA than industry standard

Reflection

Accelerated pathways are not free grants—they are pathways earned through clear evidence of benefit in a serious unmet need. This team had both the science and the need, but they did not yet have the language to communicate it to regulators. By building a TPP that explicitly mapped to FDA decision criteria and demonstrating feasibility through our roadmap, we positioned them to have a productive conversation with regulators from day one. The designation followed. The pathway cleared. The execution continues.

Your Program Could Be Next

Every drug development journey is unique. Let us discuss yours and map the clearest path to your next milestone.

Book a Free Strategy Call