SDP4 Gene therapy

SDP4 –Opportunities and challenges for Sweden to become internationally leading in the field of gene therapy

Lead: Pfizer
Involved partners: Karolinska Cell Therapy Centre/SLL, GE Healthcare, RISE, Noricon, Recipharm, Combigene

This project aims to identify opportunities and challenges for Sweden to become internationally leading in the field of gene therapy. Face to face meetings and a workshop in November 2018 have been used to begin identifying key challenges and bottle necks (SWOT analyses) and suggest actionable recommendations which will lead to a final report and symposium in 2019.

This project has now concluded. Findings can be found in the following report;

Swelife Gene therapy report 2020-02-24

A short summary of the report can be found here.

A webinar presenting the report was held the 20th of October 2020.

See the recording here;

Gene Therapy, an opportunity of a threat – how do we solve financing of new, innovative treatments?

https://www.folkhalsodalen.se/play-3

Interview with Linnea Enstedt (RISE)

What did your project set out to achieve?

The aim of the project was to increase the understanding of what infrastructures for manufacturing of gene therapy products (pre-clinical and clinical) that exist in Sweden today, and what infrastructure that is needed from an industry point of view. The focus has been on the scale up of the production of gene therapy products to meet future demands.

What were the main findings of this project?

We found that there is already established communication and interaction between actors in the field, which is positive. This can be built-upon to start new initiatives focusing on the production of gene therapies. An important topic to discuss further is that small companies seek regional CMO’s that have experience with specific gene therapies, but CMO’s may have doubts on expanding their production capacities since the customer base (at least locally) is still small.

What unexpected findings/benefits arose from the project?

One of the discussion points raised was that basic education regarding gene therapy production is lacking at Swedish universities. The competence is covered mainly at companies and by PhD programs. Another relevant question to discuss further is what niches of the gene therapy area that would be most valuable to focus on at a national level.

What’s next? What is needed to develop this further?

We encourage expansion of the current networks focusing on ATMP’s,  to enable continued discussions and joint investments.

To find out more about the report contact Linnea Enstedt