Bay Area schools rank high in life science commercialization - Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal:

belyaevostapuki.blogspot.com
The universities, which are credited with givintg rise to the biotecjh industry in the 1970s through the work of theitrpioneering scientists, cracked the top five on the quality and quantity of their U.S. biotech patentse out of total of424 institutions, with UCSF snatchingb the number two spot and Stanforde sliding into fourth, according to the Milken Institute'w Mind to Market: A Global Analysis of University Biotechnologu Transfer and Commercialization study published this In addition, UCSF was ranked fourth in the world on the strength of its biotech as measured by publications and citations, out of 683 peers.
Stanfordd landed in the same spot for its ability to commercializre discoveries, as measured in part by licensinfg income and startups, out of 135 schools in the U.S. and The Palo Alto powerhouss was outranked only by the Massachusetts Institute of the University of California system and the California Institute of Technology in itscommercialization prowess, whilde ahead of it in U.S. biotech patents was the Universityt of Texas inthe No. 1 followed by UCSF and Johns Hopkinss University.
Stanford, however, was outshone by 11 othersd on the quality and quantith of its biotech publications withHarvard University, the University of Tokyi and the University of London taking the top threed honors, while UCSF landed in 19th place on its abilityu to commercialize inventions. (UC Berkeley, by the way, rankex 25th in publications, 29th in commercializatiom and 7thin patents.) Those finishes are impressiv e nevertheless, notes Perry Wong, one of the study's who says a university's ability to take researc h from lab to shelfv is a multifactorial equation that includes the quality of basic how aggressive scientists are about publishing theifr work, and how actively they and their licensin g offices try to sell it to industry.
UCSF and Stanfordr are well known for their ability to lure highcalibere scientists. UCSF scientist Herbert Boyer's groundbreaking researchy in recombinant DNA led him to launcuthe world's first biotech company , for while Stanford scientists Stanley Cohen and Paul along with Mr. Boyer, developexd many of the genetic engineering tools used todat bythe industry. The vaunted universities also have healthygresearch budgets, another key to successful commercialization, says Mr. Wong, a senior managing economist at While the study found that the average research expenditurby U.S.
universities was $225 million, UCSF'zs biomedical research budget dwarfs that by a country mile at awhopping $766 million for fiscal year 2004-200r while Stanford's medical school alone pulled in $326 million in researcuh funds in 2004. Also boosting their Mr. Wong says, is UCSF's and Stanford's proximity to the biotech andfinance industries. Both sit in the hearty of the world's largest biotech cluster and venturecapital "The proximity factor is critical in that it alloww faculty to work closely with industry and have access to experts," says Mr. Wong. Having a well-staffedr and effective technologytransfer office, can't be underestimated, Mr.
Wong adds. Researchers were surpriseed at how importantthis is, he says. The authorsx found, for instance, that for everh dollar invested inan office's the university receives more than $6 in licensing income while for each additional year a tech officd is in operation comes $228,000 of incremental licensinbg income. Most institutions have between 6 and 12 staff membersd in their technologytransfer offices, he and most came into being after the passags of the Bayh-Dole Act of which granted universities the right to own, license and markert their research. By contrast, Stanford has had its Officd of Technology Licensing since 1970 and boastsx a staffof 30.
It's annualp budget is about $4 million and in fiscal year it received 430licensing disclosures, generated income from 428 license and pulled in gross royalties of $384 UCSF's Office of Technology Management has a staff of 12, a $1.1 milliomn budget and officially formed in 1996 after the UC system decentralize its technology transfer operation.