Alliance Boots, the UK’s leading pharmacy provider, has allied with BioCity, the UK’s leading bioscience incubation company, to establish a new health business incubator.

MedCity, a new subsidiary of BioCity, will provide laboratory and office space for start-up and growing life science companies in the Nottingham Enterprise Zone on the Alliance Boots site at Beeston.

The new medical science incubator will combine BioCity’s experience of creating environments for life science businesses to grow in with Alliance Boots’ long experience of the medical supply chain.

Both companies have roots in Nottingham and have played key roles in the development of the city’s life science business community.

Dr Glenn Crocker (pictured), CEO of BioCity, said: “MediCity is a timely addition to the thriving healthcare and medical technology sector in the UK. I am particularly excited by the benefits Alliance Boots market insights can bring to early-stage companies, with the potential to accelerate development and provide a possible route to market.

“We are interested in speaking to all businesses involved in health, beauty and wellness, whether they are established or still developing a concept.”

“We warmly welcome MediCity onto our site,” said Alex Gourlay, Chief Executive, Health & Beauty Division, Alliance Boots. “Alliance Boots and BioCity’s complementary expertise will attract businesses to MediCity and further enhance our existing world-class innovation hub in Nottingham.”

Alliance Boots has over 3,000 pharmacy-led health and beauty retail businesses in nine countries. BioCity manages business incubation sites in Nottingham, Glasgow and Alderley Edge.

The PM Society, a leading organisation for marketing in the life science industries, has appointed David Southern as leader of its NHS Partnerships Interest Group.

Southern, the Director of Pathway Communications, has experience of working both with NHS organisations to redesign services and with pharmaceutical companies to develop their NHS strategy.

He replaces Ivor Eisenstadt, who has retired from the voluntary position in order to focus on his business, the publisher MGP Ltd, and on working with CCG Patient Participation Groups.

The PM Society’s NHS Partnerships Interest Group is concerned with promoting and enhancing joint working partnerships between the pharmaceutical industry and the newly deregulated NHS.

Southern commented that the group “has been extremely active from the outset in sharing understanding of how industry can work with the NHS in this new era.

“Standalone events for members and a presence at key meetings have enabled both doctors, commissioners and industry representatives to share best practice, inform and educate,” he added. “I am looking forward to progressing opportunities such as this to promote excellence in NHS joint working.”

Pathway Communications, which Southern founded in 2008, has worked with hospital and primary care trusts to develop and implement new clinical services.

Before that, he worked in the pharmaceutical industry for 15 years, helping companies to develop their NHS strategy, define their healthcare offering and model patient pathways.

The PM Society NHS Partnerships Interest Group was formed in 2012 to support joint working by sharing experience and good practice, and by offering practical support to developing partnership projects.

The PM Society is a not-for-profit organisation with members from over 230 life science companies.

Four UK pharmaceutical and biotechnology SMEs have won the opportunity to promote their innovations at BIO 2013 in Chicago (22–25 April).

The winners of the UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) Innovation Competition are Abcodia, Critical Pharmaceuticals, Nanomerics and PsiOxus Therapeutics.

The companies will receive £1,500 towards flights and accommodation, and a year’s free membership of the BioIndustry Association (BIA).

The UKTI Innovation Competition, open to life science SMEs in the UK, highlights excellence in groundbreaking technologies for a global audience.

As the world’s largest biotechnology event, attended by delegates from more than 65 countries, the BIO Convention represents a major opportunity for small UK companies to make contacts.

Abcodia (London) discovers and validates biomarkers for the early detection and screening of cancer. Critical Pharmaceuticals (Nottingham) is developing a pipeline of recombinant protein and peptide therapies, using patented drug delivery technologies. Nanomerics (London) is a speciality pharmaceutical company that uses patented nanotechnology to boost the performance of known drugs. PsiOxus Therapeutics (Oxfordshire) is developing novel therapies for cancer and other life-threatening diseases.

Gareth King, CEO of Critical Pharmaceuticals, said: “We have recently announced the results of a second clinical study on our intranasal growth hormone product demonstrating clinical proof of concept, and look forward to meeting with commercial partners at BIO 2013 to progress the product into phase 2/3 clinical development.”

“Nanomerics is delighted to be able to showcase to a global audience its Molecular Envelope Technology, which boosts the activity of drugs and gets them where they need to be,” explained Andreas Schatzlein, CEO of Nanomerics. “In a time of undiminished medical need and increasing economic pressure it is crucial that we make the most of the drug compounds that we already understand.”

The NHS is a key “national asset” for life science innovation, Prime Minister David Cameron has said.

Speaking at the inaugural Global Health Policy Summit in London, Cameron emphasised the relationship between NHS reform and the Government’s innovation strategy.

Developments such as value-based pricing and making anonymised NHS patient data available to researchers would “bring breakthroughs in long-neglected areas like dementia”, he claimed.

Cameron stated that his goal in healthcare was to make the NHS “diverse, flexible and tailored to individual needs”, thereby adapting it as a research base to the challenge of developing personalised medicine.

Global healthcare was undergoing a “fundamental shift” towards “individually-tailored” medicine, he said, driven by the growing prevalence of non-communicable diseases and the progress of genetic research.

To achieve that required “open innovation, more collaboration with universities and start-ups, and a greater emphasis on data analytics and genomics”.

The unique patient data resources and purchasing power of the NHS made it a natural partner for life science innovation, he argued.

To develop that relationship, the Government had given the NHS a legal duty to promote research, was planning to introduce value-based pricing, and was consulting on an early access scheme for new medicines.

Crucially, it planned to change the NHS constitution so that patient data could be used for research unless the patient opted out.

Stephen Whitehead, Chief Executive of the ABPI, commented that the trade association valued the Government’s “continued support for industry” and agreed that the NHS offered the life science industry a “great opportunity”.

However, he said, “we are not convinced that value-based pricing will encourage innovation or reward the most effective medicines,” as it would not reflect the incremental nature of innovation or reward the industry enough for its R&D.

As the era of blockbuster drugs draws to an end, the pharmaceutical industry is looking to fresh markets and new models of drug development while facing legislative changes as well as economic threats. Sarah Hanson looks at what lies ahead for the industry in 2012.

2012 looks set to be the year when pharmaceutical companies face their scariest outlook: peering over the brink of a patent cliff. Major pharmaceutical companies are realising that they can no longer rely on a broken business model that is dependent on blockbuster drugs, and are looking for alternative ways to maintain profits and cover the loss of revenues due to patent expiry. This throws up a host of commercial, legal and regulatory challenges.

Entering new markets
Major structural shifts are taking place in R&D and how intellectual property is financed, meaning that the life sciences sector is providing a rare bright spot in the pervading economic gloom. Over the last decade, there has been almost US$700bn worth of deals in the pharmaceutical sector, which remains one of the prime industries in terms of M&A activity. Now we are likely to be at the start of a fresh cycle of M&A activity in the industry, with a particular focus on emerging markets (BRIC, South-East Europe and Turkey) where the portfolios of many pharma companies remain weak.

Japan has enjoyed a particularly busy year in terms of pharmaceutical M&A: across all sectors, cross-border acquisitions by Japanese companies nearly tripled relative to 2010. Liquidity among Japanese pharma companies remains strong, as does demand for prescription medicines from an ageing population, enabling Japanese companies to enter into deals at a time of intense competition for intellectual property in the industry. In 2011 Takeda, the largest Japanese pharmaceutical company, completed its €9.6bn (debt-free, cash-free) acquisition of Swiss drug company Nycomed. On the back of this transformative deal, we expect the industry to undertake more M&A activity in Japan in 2012. Factors such as the economic climate, demography and the state of R&D pipelines should see more Asian acquisitions of European patented drugs.

Emerging markets also continue to receive significant life science private equity (PE) investment, with China and India gaining the most. Historically, the risk involved in R&D has led PE firms to avoid large pharma companies and the biopharma industry in general. However, recently some small deals have linked PE and venture capital with biotechnology, and we are seeing investment in a number of diverse projects in different life science areas. This growing trend is already playing out in Europe – according to the European Private Equity and Venture Capital Association, the total investment in life sciences in Europe increased from €3.4bn in 2009 to €5.7bn in 2010, while the total venture investment in life sciences accounted for 30% of the total investment in Europe in 2010. Such funding is likely to increase as the cash-rich life sciences sector is seen to be ’recession proof’.

A helping hand for R&D
Pharmaceutical companies looking to weather the storm of patent expiry on key products are also looking to diversify their pipelines and develop replacement products. With most companies struggling to make a return on high R&D costs pumped into prospective pipelines, additional support is vital.

In the UK, the Government hopes its new Patent Box legislation will give a welcome boost to research and development. When it comes into force in April 2013, the Patent Box will reduce UK corporation tax on patent profits to 10%, encouraging R&D activity and providing incentives for companies to retain intellectual property in the UK. This will make the UK competitive with other European countries such as Ireland, Switzerland and Hungary, which have had similar systems in place for years. While the existing system of R&D tax credits has given some relief for R&D expenditure, there has until now been no similar incentive for businesses to retain their IP in the UK once it has been created.

Legislation such as Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) will also play a significant role in assisting companies facing the expiry of major patent portfolios and provide more protection for companies investing heavily in R&D. EU patent offices have long been able to grant SPCs where there has been a large gap for a company between filing a patent application and getting authorisation to market a drug. However, legal issues surround how SPCs apply to medicines that contain more than one active ingredient. In a landmark case in November 2011, the Court of Justice of the EU said that there is no reason why an SPC may not be granted for a single active ingredient that is specified in a patent where the marketing authorisation also contains other active ingredients. This (and other recent cases regarding SPCs) is likely to have further ramifications in battles between generic and pharmaceutical companies into 2012.

New legislation: help or hindrance?
New legislation coming into force will also have an impact on the pharma industry in the year ahead. Whether the expected IP and regulatory legislation will help or hinder pharmaceutical companies in this challenging climate remains to be seen.

A number of significant regulatory issues are being debated in Europe. A Directive is being developed to improve the EU pharmacovigilance system, simplify regulatory decision-making, provide a legal basis for more proactive pharmacovigilance by both regulatory authorities and the industry, and involve patients more closely in reporting adverse drug reactions. Though it was adopted in 2010, compliance is not compulsory until 2012. The legislation will bring about the most profound change to the legal framework since 1995, when the EMA was set up. The European Commission, EMA and Member States have been carrying out work to implement the legislation, but companies still lack clarity on many of the new obligations. It is likely that the new requirements will be introduced in phases beyond the original July 2012 implementation deadline.

At a time when social networking continues to grow and become part of the daily routine of many working lives, pharmacovigilance is particularly important. The pharma industry must recognise that social networking and reporting are taking on a rapidly-increasing significance in the marketing, discussion and exchange of information concerning drugs. There are pharmacovigilance obligations at all stages of the life cycle of a medicine and the process of drug monitoring; the pharmacovigilance system will need to take account of this, not least because the increasing use of social media also poses interesting questions around geographical legal jurisdiction.

Discussions continue about the introduction of a Directive that would require substantial changes to the regulation of clinical trials. In March 2010, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that the Government would review the UK’s implementation of the Clinical Trials Directive in order to reduce perceived gold-plating and to increase the proportionality of the system. The MHRA has stated that it intends to wait for the outcome of the European negotiations before reviewing and amending the UK legislation.
2012 may also herald significant changes in the way drugs are marketed. EFPIA in particular will be under the spotlight this year as the implications of amendments to the advertising of medicines become apparent. Currently, the advertisement for a medicine must be in line with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC). Hence off-label promotion is not allowed. EFPIA has approved an amended Code of Practice on the promotion of prescription-only medicines to, and interactions with, healthcare professionals.

The changes to the Code make allowance, for example, for the provision of a limited number of samples to healthcare professionals for a limited time (Art. 16).  Previously, following EU Directive 2001/83/CE, the provision of samples was not allowed (due to concern over inducement); but in accordance with national and/or EU laws and regulations, a limited number of medical samples may now be supplied on an exceptional basis and for a limited period. A reasonable interpretation of this provision is that each health professional should receive, per year, not more than four medical samples of a particular medicine that he/she is qualified to prescribe for two years after he/she first requests samples of that particular medicine.

A landmark year
Last year saw significant developments for the pharma industry – and for lawyers – which look set to continue through 2012. With deals such as Takeda’s acquisition of Nycomed in 2011, we expect the trend of commercial and economic power shifting eastward to continue. Increased diversification, coupled with regulatory hurdles, will set a challenge for the pharma industry. Whether companies will survive and thrive on this challenge remains to be seen as the year unfolds, but the structural upheaval felt as a result of life beyond the patent cliff is already being witnessed.

Sarah Hanson is a partner at CMS Cameron McKenna: the UK branch of CMS, a leading European provider of legal and tax advice.

With the Government aiming to increase innovation within the NHS, pharma has been tasked with helping to meet the challenge. Omar Ali, in his Matrix Revolutions series, focuses on the means to help the industry find the next big thing.  

With so many documents to read – white papers, NHS initiatives and DH directives – keeping tabs on the direction of travel of the NHS, as well as the pace of change, makes life difficult; and that’s not including the latest clinical trials, review publications and NICE guidance. In this issue of the Matrix Revolutions, I want to review one of the most important and potentially game changing documents to have
crossed my desk: Innovation, Health and Wealth.

The document comes under ‘improvement and efficiency’ from the DH and has an impressive circulation list. However, if the cascade didn’t get past those at directorship level, the average GP and healthcare professional may not have received what is a very important document. It also goes hand-in-hand with a story from NICE in February – Improving access to NICE-approved drugs – which provided the NHS with a best-practice guide on the implementation of local formularies in accordance with national guidance.

Innovation, Health and Wealth calls for all NHS organisations to come to ‘action’ by starting planning processes for the implementation of innovative new treatments approved by NICE.

“…while the NHS is recognised as a world leader in invention, the spread of those inventions within the NHS has often been too slow, and sometimes even the best of them fail to achieve widespread use”

I think we would all recognise this symptom of the NHS and list numerous examples. The UK is well known in being conservative with its adoption and prescribing of new drugs. But when NICE makes deep probing evaluations of new treatments it may be disturbing to find such variation in the implementation of best practice and subsequent availability of new medicines for patients.

It’s well known that when HTA agencies reject drugs the NHS is very good at implementing rapid ‘decommissioned’ formularies, which make general prescribing and availability very limited. However, when NICE does approve a new treatment, the variable uptake observed within the NHS as a whole has resulted in this new initiative.

“The challenge both for the NHS and for its industry partners is to pursue innovations that genuinely add value but not cost”

This is interesting how it adds up… I’m supposed to work with you to find innovations that don’t add cost… The problem with documents is rhetoric and direction. In reality, implementation will come down to precise and specific details. There are not many new drugs that ‘don’t add cost’ – they all add cost! The modelling comes in finding those that may offset some of the costs (QIPP).

“This report has been developed as part of the Prime Minister’s UK Strategy for Health Innovation and Life Sciences. The aim of this strategy is to ensure that the UK maintains and builds on its world leading position for life sciences, that the potential of life sciences to contribute to UK growth is realised, and that the UK remains and grows as an attractive location for investment now and in the future”

The flavour of the document paints a clear picture of investment from pharma which will potentially deteriorate within the UK due to poor uptake/diffusion by the NHS. The difficulty lays in that ‘uptake’ criteria for the NHS doesn’t have ‘investment’ as part of the decision process. For example, if a company invests millions into UK R&D and produces a poor, non-innovative and non-cost effective drug, should we put it on formulary due to the fact they have invested in the UK economy? If the answer is ‘yes’, we all need to change the paradigm and throw QIPP out of the window. I guess the alternative is how long can pharma keep resourcing UK investment and see no return? Not long in this climate. Surely then the answer is as seen above: the challenge of making new, innovative drugs cost effective.

Having helped bring NHS payers, CCG commissioners and pharma together, it brings some common ground on market access. I have found that with all of the details, some dedicated quality time with stakeholders and some flexibility from pharma, we can always find some manner of value-added to the product and/or a financial/value proposition that changes the paradigm. The truth is we don’t spend enough quality time talking together about the real issues. We tend to spend poorly co-ordinated NHS/pharma interactions looking at insane cost-models and budget impacts that are largely irrelevant. Add to that ABPI/compliance and internal concordance issues, and the NHS and pharma are often dancing around the tables instead of having decent commercial business discussions that pave the way to a healthier, wealthier future for both.

Potential barriers
“Poor access to evidence, data and metrics”

I have been impressed with some of the data informatics I have seen that actually represent data handling with a view to Secondary Uses Service (SUS) information, hospital episodes and prescribing by the CCG sector or a PCT. Here, pharma is beginning to excel themselves and it does have an influence on working together. This approach is far better than those companies who have a black-box approach to health economics.

“Insufficient recognition and celebration of innovation and innovators”

It’s hard for NHS innovators to ‘step out’ and stick their heads above the parapets when those around them are stuck in the same old ways. Far from recognition or reward, one can expect pushing uphill and against the grain. The only way to succeed here is to believe in the cause of innovation and true improvement. My feeling is those ‘beacons of light’ are beginning to shine in healthcare – and love it or hate it – one of the strengths of the Health Bill is bringing those leaders to the forefront through sheer necessity. My observation is that the pharma culture celebrates innovation from the core – it’s what you do and what you believe in. Being an optimist, I believe pharma has a role on the ground in bringing some of that innovation to ‘rub-off’ on your NHS customers.

“Financial levers do not reward innovators and can act as a disincentive to adoption and diffusion”

You may have read my previous Matrix Revolutions ‘case’ on Prolia (denosumab) – it had a NICE TAG but saw variable uptake, even a year after its recommendation. This case clearly outlined how micro-economics and financial levers can stall the introduction of new innovative therapies. But getting the tariffs to match, commissioning to fund and finding the code to unlock prescribing took a long time… why? Partly because our own informatics is poor – an example of the NHS barrier – and partly because dealing with payer issues doesn’t come first-hand to most brand teams.
Other financial levers that will inhibit uptake include:

• Enhanced LES & DES warfarin payments to GPs which will be a threatened source of income with new oral anticoagulants.
• QoF cholesterol targets of 5mmol/l in the face of innovative agents which may achieve lower cholesterol targets and reduced outcomes.
• QIPP Indicators aiming for a percentage of metformin and sulphonylurea when newer agents for type 2 diabetes reduce incidence of hypoglycaemic episodes and save money on blood glucose testing strips.

In the next issue of Matrix Revolutions, Omar Ali continues to review the DH’s modernisation plans and also focuses on what makes the diffusion of innovation happen. 

Omar Ali is the Formulary Development Pharmacist for Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust and sits on the External Reference Group for Cost Impact Modelling for NICE. He can be reached at omar.ali@sash.nhs.uk.

Improving regulatory compliance in the wake of global legislation around anti-corruption has emerged as one of pharma’s key challenges for 2012.

A 2011 Cap Gemini report on impending change within life sciences showed that only addressing ‘fragmented business processes’ and a ‘lack of access to business critical data’ rank higher as the most critical issues for the sector.

But despite widespread recognition of the importance of business transparency in all interactions with customers, a recent study shows that 44% of pharma companies are still using manual paper-based systems to record promotional spend with HCPs.

The survey, European Trends in Aggregate Spend, Transparency and Disclosure, conducted in December 2011 by Cegedim Relationship Management, shows that life science companies are making real progress in their attempts to become more compliant. 94% of respondents report that their company enforces corporate standards for spending on HCPs, and over half (54%) indicate that their company already has a project team in place to address compliance issues.

But, despite 64% believing that the implementation of a unique spend data reporting and disclosure solution is an ‘absolute requirement’, a high number of European companies are using traditional methodology to record activity.

“Europe is at a pivotal moment as it approaches an enforcement model increasingly similar to the US,” explained Bill Buzzeo (pictured), Vice President of Global Compliance Solutions at Cegedim Relationship Management. “Companies are making essential strides at self-enforcement, but according to the 2011 survey, most respondents are reliant on inefficient manual and Excel spreadsheet reporting mechanisms.”

Faced with managing relationships within an already complicated customer jigsaw, medical sales professionals can ill afford the administrative burden of paper-based systems in the modern era.

The increased focus on transparency and disclosure follows the global development and enforcement of regulation and guidance to counter bribery and corruption across business sectors. The US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the UK Bribery Act impose criminal charges on companies that breach the law, and have already led to some high-profile casualties in the life science sector. In 2011, Johnson & Johnson were fined $70 million after admitting that the company bribed doctors in Europe and paid kickbacks to win contracts and sell drugs and artificial joints. Integrated technology company Siemens paid $1.3 billion following a bribery case that scarred its medical division, following violations in its healthcare unit.

With further, hard-hitting legislation expected in other parts of Europe this year, companies are being forced to assess their ability to achieve better transparency of aggregate HCP payment data – which in turn is having major implications for the industry’s sales and marketing strategies. Companies in Europe must not only track a complex matrix of marketing and promotional spending, but also keep track of, and uphold, each country’s unique reporting standards.

The Cegedim Relationship Management survey concludes that the US model of operational compliance serves as “the handwriting on the wall”, but warns that European organisations, uncertain as to how to approach transparency in the future, must act quickly to ensure they avoid paying a much higher price.

The UK industry has worked hard in recent years to improve its reputation with customers, and the issue of building trust with HCPs remains a high priority for companies. Medical sales professionals will continue to play a prominent role in achieving this.

Pfizer is working with a property consortium to fill its recently-closed Sandwich facility with life science companies.

The Discovery Park site, where Viagra was developed in the 1990s, will become an Enterprise Zone leased to multiple life science companies for R&D.

Pfizer itself will lease some of the facilities, where 650 of its employees still work following the closure of the main facility in 2011.

The site provides about 280,000 square metres of accommodation, including many specialist life science laboratories.

According to a Pfizer spokesperson, the company “has entered into a period of legal exclusivity with a consortium led by London & Metropolitan and financed by a major European institutional real estate investor for the sale of the Discovery Park campus in Sandwich, Kent.

“This announcement is a positive milestone in the transition of Discovery Park to becoming an R&D led multiple-use campus with Enterprise Zone status.”

Following discussions with London and Metropolitan, local Conservative MP Laura Sandys commented that the property consortium has a “very clear vision about having a strong life-science park that will attract people internationally”.

The Government needs to do more to support life sciences in the UK and create an environment where the industry can flourish, a new survey has found.

RSA’s The UK Life Sciences Leaders’ Survey 2011 revealed worries over the NHS reforms, medicine pricing and reimbursement, employment issues and the cost of research amongst its leaders.

Nick Stephens, CEO of RSA, says the Government “urgently needs to do more to ensure that education, regulation, access to medicines and the NHS research base align to support the industry’s continued contribution to the UK economy”.

The report is the second annual survey of industry bosses. Last year the general feeling was of optimism with leaders believing the recently elected coalition Government would improve the business environment.

But twelve months later the mood has changed with results finding leaders claim the UK is not competing effectively globally, creating opportunities for early phase/smaller companies or making the most of its unique selling points: the NHS and skills in innovation and discovery.

Leaders also raised concerns about the increasing cost of working in the UK, the implication of R&D as a result of the NHS reforms, the regulatory burden on operations and the process from development to market. They also advised that fiscal and tax incentives should be given to SMEs to help their growth and the UK compete globally.

Worries were also raised about the introduction of value-based pricing. However, in contrast, health technology assessments were broadly welcomed as a means of enhancing value and meeting therapeutic requirements, the report found.

During the tough economic environment, the survey found that leaders would focus on innovation, creating flexible organisations and processes, and refocusing research and development to weather the current storm.

In a perfect world, leaders revealed they would investing in R&D and make the healthcare sector, regulatory and commercial environment work closer together to achieve better outcomes for patients and the pharmaceutical industry.

Stephen Whitehead, CEO, ABPI, says the survey shows more support is needed for biopharmaceutical companies in the ever-changing NHS. “There is much that the Government has done to support the industry, particularly through the Growth Review and the Office for Life Sciences,” he said. “But we need to build on this as part of a continuing relationship with NHS and Government to explore how unnecessary bureaucracy can be eliminated from the healthcare system so that new treatments can reach patients as quickly as possible.”

J&J is creating a new biotech and health IT ‘innovation centre’ as part of its pharmaceutical facility in San Diego.

The healthcare giant expects 18 to 20 life science start-up companies to join the new centre, to be called ‘Janssen Labs at San Diego’.

Diego Miralles, who oversees J&J’s San Diego centre, said: “It’s a completely ‘no-strings attached’ business model.”

He said that start-up companies in the new centre will pay a monthly ‘licensing fee’ to J&J, but the landlord agreement does not grant J&J an equity stake in the businesses.

He estimated the innovation centre will be made up of “modular and flexible” offices available for companies developing mostly biotech and health IT-related technologies. The companies would share a common area for the storage of high-end research equipment, as well as office supplies and other tools.

J&J plans to open the new centre by April 2012.