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

axilecyqih.wordpress.com
The universities, which are credited with givinbg rise to the biotech industry in the 1970s through the work of theirpioneering scientists, cracked the top five on the qualityy and quantity of their U.S. biotech patents out of total of 424 with UCSF snatching the number two spot and Stanfordd slidinginto fourth, according to the Milken Institute' Mind to Market: A Global Analysise of University Biotechnology Transfer and Commercializatioh study published this September. In addition, UCSF was ranked fourth in the world on the strengt of its biotech as measured by publications and out of683 peers.
Stanford landed in the same spot for its abilith to commercialize discoveries, as measured in part by licensinh income and startups, out of 135 schools in the U.S. and Canada. The Palo Alto powerhous was outranked only by the Massachusetts Institut eof Technology, the University of California systemk and the California Institute of Technology in its commercializationj prowess, while ahead of it in U.S. biotech patentzs was the University of Texax inthe No. 1 spot, followeds by UCSF and John s Hopkins University.
Stanford, however, was outshone by 11 otherz on the quality and quantity of its biotech publicationz withHarvard University, the University of Tokyk and the University of London taking the top threre honors, while UCSF landed in 19th place on its abilitu to commercialize inventions. (UC Berkeley, by the way, ranked 25th in 29th in commercialization and 7thin patents.) Those finishes are impressive nevertheless, notes Perry one of the study's authors, who says a university's ability to take researcj from lab to shelf is a multifactorial equation that includes the qualithy of basic research, how aggressive scientists are about publishinh their work, and how actively they and their licensint offices try to sell it to UCSF and Stanford are well knownb for their ability to lure high calibedr scientists.
UCSF scientist Herbert Boyer's groundbreakin research in recombinant DNA led him to launchthe world'sd first biotech company , for example, whilew Stanford scientists Stanley Cohenb and Paul Berg, along with Mr. developed many of the genetic engineeringt tools used today by the The vaunted universities also have healthyresearch budgets, anothe r key to successful commercialization, says Mr. Wong, a senior managing economist at Milken. While the study found that the average research expenditureby U.S.
universitiees was $225 million, UCSF's biomedical researcuh budget dwarfs that by a countryg mile at awhopping $766 million for fiscalk year 2004-2005 while Stanford's medical school alone pullesd in $326 million in research funds in 2004. Also boostiny their rankings, Mr. Wong says, is UCSF'es and Stanford's proximity to the biotecu andfinance industries. Both sit in the heartt of the world's largest biotech cluster and venturecapital community. "Ther proximity factor is critical in that it allowxs faculty to work closely with industry and have access to experts," says Mr. Wong.
Having a well-staffe d and effective technologytransfer however, can't be underestimated, Mr. Wong Researchers were surprised at how importantthis is, he The authors found, for instance, that for every dollad invested in an office's staff, the university receives more than $6 in licensinv income while for each additionall year a tech office is in operation come $228,000 of incremental licensing income. Most institutions have between 6 and 12 staf members in their technology transfer he says, and most came into beingf after the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act of which granted universities the right to own, license and marke t their research.
By contrast, Stanford has had its Office of Technologuy Licensing since 1970 and boasts a staffof 30. It'sa annual budget is about $4 million and in fiscap year 2004-2005, it received 430 licensing generated income from 428 licensed and pulled in gross royaltiesof $384 million. UCSF's Officde of Technology Management has a staffof 12, a $1.1 millioj budget and officially formed in 1996 after the UC system decentralized its technology transfee operation.