Partnerships have long been central to biotech and biopharma development, but the way companies work with external providers is changing. As programs become more complex, many organizations are looking for partners who can contribute specialist expertise, support multiple stages of development, and help manage risk across discovery, manufacturing, regulatory strategy, and commercialization.
For Biopharma Vital Signs, we asked industry leaders for their views on the state of biotech and biopharma today – including the trends shaping development, the pressure points slowing progress, and the practical challenges companies are navigating as programs advance.
Explore the full Biopharma Vital Signs series here.
In Part 4, we ask:
How are partnership models changing across the biopharma ecosystem?
Gavin Murdoch, SVP of Commercial Strategy, Abzena
The growing technical diversity and complexity of newer modalities has made it virtually impossible for any single company, CRO, or CDMO to master every discipline. The era of the generalist is over. To advance science and serve patients faster, organizations must identify their strengths and address their gaps.
Partnership models now span a wide spectrum, from loose referral networks and defined role-and-responsibility agreements to partial ownership, licensing arrangements, and more closely coordinated development models from discovery through to patient delivery. Rather than stitching together fragmented solutions, companies are increasingly looking for continuity across the development journey, reducing project handoff risk, compressing timelines, and maintaining quality from early development through commercial supply.
Highly specialized niche providers with focused expertise in areas like cell discovery or fill/finish still play an important role. When properly orchestrated, these partnerships can create faster, higher-quality outcomes for patients.
Jeremy Skillington, CEO, Poolbeg Pharma
The most recent trend is big pharma looking to partner with Chinese companies on Chinese-originated medicines. The standard of Chinese research and development has significantly improved over the past decade and programmes with compelling clinical data are being licensed at premium prices. The key aspect has been western-trained Chinese scientists returning home with a better understanding of what diligence requirements pharma has in order to partner programmes. All of the rigour and data quality requirements are put in place for deals and collaborations to follow. Notable recent examples include AstraZeneca partnering with CSPC Pharmaceutical Group in the obesity and diabetes space with a deal value up to $18.5B and BMS partnering with Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals on their oncology, immunology and hematology programmes with a deal value up to $15.2B. Clearly there is strong belief and commitment from ‘western’ pharma to their Chinese collaborators.
Cora Griffin, Head of Business Development, Curve Therapeutics Ltd
Large pharma is facing a $300 billion-plus wave of revenue loss from patent expirations through the end of the decade, and that urgency is reshaping how deals are structured. We are seeing transactions focused on differentiated science including next generation modalities, and the structures are increasingly milestone-weighted to reflect shared risk. High growth therapeutic areas such as immunology, oncology and cardiometabolic disease now account for the lion’s share of dealmaking.
There has also been a geographic shift, with China-focused deals now overtaking those from the rest of the world. As of the end of 2025, 32 percent of out-licensing deals were from China. BMS signed a strategic partnership worth $15.2 billion with Hengrui last month spanning 13 early-stage programmes across oncology, haematology, and immunology – the Company’s first major, modern-day, China-sourced innovation and licensing "blockbuster" deal. For European and US biotechs, this raises the competitive bar significantly. However, geography matters less than the quality of the asset – what pharma is really hunting for is true platform differentiation and scientific credibility, addressing an area of unmet medical need.
Gina Eagle, Clinical Research Physician, Kither Biotech
We are increasingly seeing a more specialized biopharma ecosystem, where smaller biotech companies play a central role in discovery, translational work, and early clinical development, while larger pharmaceutical companies often engage later through licensing, acquisition, co-development, or strategic support. This is not because large pharma lacks development capabilities, but because smaller companies can often move faster, remain more focused, and integrate scientific, clinical, regulatory, and manufacturing decisions very closely around a single asset or platform.
From our perspective at Kither, this model is particularly relevant. Early development requires deep scientific ownership, rapid decision-making, and the ability to adapt quickly as new data emerge. A smaller, highly motivated team can align non-clinical, CMC, clinical, regulatory, and business perspectives in real time, which is extremely valuable when developing a novel therapy.
As programs mature, partnership needs evolve. Larger companies can bring important scale, commercial infrastructure, late-stage development experience, and global reach. However, the quality of the early evidence package remains critical: robust non-clinical data, well-designed early clinical studies, clear differentiation, and a credible development strategy are what make later partnerships possible. In this sense, the market has shifted toward a model where small biotech companies are not just innovation sources, but key drivers of early value creation.
Alison Clayton, Strategic Projects Director, Symbiosis Pharmaceutical Services
As therapies become more complex, partnership models are evolving beyond the traditional customer-supplier relationship. Increasingly, companies are looking for partners who can contribute expertise, provide strategic input and help navigate challenges, rather than simply deliver against a predefined scope of work.
Many emerging biotech companies operate with lean teams and rely on external partners to supplement their internal capabilities. As such, partnerships are becoming more integrated and collaborative, creating greater demand for relationships that enable knowledge sharing, problem-solving and access to specialist expertise. In this environment, partner selection is no longer based solely on technical capability. Companies are also placing greater emphasis on organisational fit, recognising that factors such as culture, communication style and ways of working can have a significant impact on long-term success.
We’re also seeing greater emphasis placed on alignment across the wider development journey. Decisions made in one area of a programme can have significant implications elsewhere, whether that’s manufacturing, regulatory strategy, supply chain planning or future commercial readiness. Strong partnerships help create visibility across these interconnected activities and support more informed decision-making.
The most effective partnerships are those where both organisations are working towards the same outcome. The focus is becoming less about individual transactions and more about combining expertise to overcome challenges, reduce risk and help promising therapies reach patients successfully.
Elizabeth Holt, Chief Business Officer, iOnctura
Partnerships are becoming more strategic and collaborative. Rather than relying solely on internal capabilities, companies are building networks that combine scientific, clinical, manufacturing, digital, and commercial expertise. We are seeing earlier engagement between biotech and pharma, as well as increased collaboration with specialist service providers and technology partners. The focus is on accelerating development, reducing risk, and creating more flexible models that help innovative therapies reach patients faster.
Claire Macht, Senior Portfolio Director at Informa Connect
At BIO-Europe, relationship-led collaborations built on trust and long-term strategic alignment take precedent. Biotech leaders are having to manage shifting regulatory, commercial, and supply chain goal posts in tandem with increasingly rapid clinical development and growing patient demand.
What strikes me most is how today's partnerships must span the entire value chain. It's no longer sufficient to focus solely on business development. The conversations I'm having with industry leaders reveal that successful partnerships now demand cross-functional engagement – CEOs, CFOs, COOs, CMOs, and CSOs working together to navigate the increasing complexity across regulation, clinical development, and manufacturing.
I'm also seeing how geopolitical uncertainty has created genuine demand for neutral, credible platforms where global decision-makers can forge partnerships with confidence. Europe's position as this trusted convening ground feels increasingly vital.
What's become clear to me is that the industry values quality over quantity. The partnerships that truly matter happen in curated environments where senior leaders can engage in candid, high-level conversations – the kind that turn into genuine outcomes rather than just meetings.
This evolution reflects an industry that understands success requires not just innovative science, but sophisticated collaboration across borders and functions – partnerships that genuinely shape our collective direction.
Tony Thomas, Director, Technical Consulting, Ecolab Bioprocessing; and Fiona Stack. Global Technical Consultant, Ecolab Life Sciences
Partnership models are definitely evolving. There’s a clear move away from transactional supplier relationships toward something much more integrated.
What we’re seeing is that manufacturers are looking for partners who can support them across multiple parts of the value chain, not just provide a single product or service. That’s driven by the level of complexity in the industry now. Whether it’s scaling a process, maintaining compliance, or keeping facilities running efficiently, these challenges don’t sit neatly in one function.
There’s also a growing expectation around accountability. Partnerships are becoming more outcome-focused, where success is measured in terms of operational performance, compliance and reliability, rather than just whether a product meets specification.
Within our pharma division, we are really seeing a shift on the manufacturing floor. Contamination control, cleaning and disinfection are no longer standalone activities. They are becoming integral to overall operational performance, directly impacting compliance, efficiency, and risk management. That’s where strong technical expertise becomes critical in helping translate strategy into something that actually works day to day.
At the same time, there’s a trust element that’s becoming more important. Customers want partners who can help them navigate change, bring consistency across sites, and support them as they scale globally.
As a strategic partner we are seeing that partnerships are becoming deeper, more collaborative, and much more tied to long-term outcomes that go beyond a single product or transaction.
Mike Ford, Director of Sales and Business Development, Kindeva
Partnership models across the biopharma ecosystem are moving away from transactional service provider-customer relationships toward more integrated, strategic collaborations. Biopharma companies are increasingly seeking specialized expertise earlier in the drug lifecycle, with input across development, formulation, device strategy, and manufacturing. This evolution is driven by the desire to reduce the risks and tech transfer friction that can arise when programs are split across multiple vendors.
In addition, modern collaboration models aim to bring technical and manufacturing considerations into the development process earlier and more continuously.
Brad Rowe, Senior Director, Integrated Development; Quotient Sciences
There is a move toward partner consolidation, with sponsors favoring integrated providers who can support drug product development, manufacturing, and clinical testing. This approach reduces the burden of managing multiple vendors, but also improves continuity, reduces risk, and enables faster progression to key value inflection points.
Greg Plunkett, CEO, Accelagen
Partnership models are becoming more integrated, apply a longer term view, and are more outcome-focused. Biotech companies are increasingly looking beyond traditional fee-for-service relationships and seeking partners who can bring strategic thinking, execution discipline, emotional investment in achieving success and flexibility across the development stages.
This is partly a response to capital pressure and partly a response to scientific complexity. Companies want centralisation of activities, better coordination, and partners who understand how decisions in one area affect timelines, regulatory risk, manufacturing feasibility, and future commercial value. As a result, there is growing demand for providers that can operate as an extension of the internal team rather than as a narrow external vendor.
The strongest partnerships are defined by shared accountability, clear decision-making, and the ability to adapt as programs evolve. In today’s environment, value comes not just from capability, but from integration, speed, and the confidence that critical issues will be identified early rather than escalated late.
Thomas Kledal, CEO, Synklino
Partnership models are becoming more integrated and value-driven. Rather than outsourcing discrete activities, companies are increasingly building ecosystems of specialist collaborators spanning discovery, translational research, clinical development, manufacturing, regulatory strategy and commercialization.
These partnerships work best when they bring complementary expertise around a shared objective: generating high-quality evidence while reducing development risk and preserving capital. Collaboration with leading academic centres, clinical investigators and disease experts has become particularly important because it strengthens translational science, helps shape clinically relevant study designs and builds confidence among regulators and investors.
Equally important is understanding the partner's perspective. Successful biotech companies do not simply present strong science – they clearly articulate how their asset creates strategic value for a partner, whether by establishing leadership in an emerging therapeutic area, strengthening an existing portfolio, or creating a differentiated commercial opportunity. Demonstrating how a programme can help a partner build and sustain a competitive position and ultimately drive a successful commercial business is increasingly central to successful partnering discussions.
Companies that can demonstrate differentiated technology, a clear biological rationale and a pathway to adoption are better positioned to attract strategic partners earlier in development.
David Claveau, Vice President, Business Development, North America, Sygnature Discovery
Partnerships are becoming more strategic, more integrated and more flexible. In the past, outsourcing was often transactional: a company would hand off a discrete package of work and receive data back. That model still has a place, but it is not enough for complex, capital-constrained drug discovery. Companies increasingly need partners who can operate as an extension of the team, contribute scientific judgement, adapt as the programme evolves and help connect decisions across disciplines. This is particularly important for emerging biotechs that may have outstanding biology but limited infrastructure. The best partnerships are built around shared objectives, transparency and rapid iteration. They also allow companies to access specialist expertise without permanently building every capability in-house. In today’s environment, a good partner is not simply a capacity provider; it is a source of speed, resilience and better decision-making.
Jordi Fàbrega, Co-Founder and CEO, Connecta Therapeutics
Partnership models across the biopharma ecosystem are becoming increasingly specialized, collaborative, and strategically focused, enabling organizations to combine complementary expertise and resources to achieve shared development goals. Biopharma companies are forming strategic alliances with academic institutions, biotechnology startups, contract research and manufacturing organizations and technology providers to accelerate innovation from target discovery through clinical development.
Cutting edge technology-driven collaborations are also reshaping the ecosystem. The growing adoption of artificial intelligence, omics, real-world data, digital health solutions and advanced manufacturing technologies is fostering partnerships with data analytics and platform technology companies to improve decision-making, streamline development and increase operational efficiency.
In addition, partnership models are becoming more flexible and milestone-based. These arrangements enable partners to share risks and resources while generating the clinical, regulatory and commercial value needed to improve the likelihood of successful regulatory approval, market access and long-term commercial success.
Mike Cooke, Co-Founder & CEO, AmacaThera
Partnerships are becoming more integrated and more strategic. In the past, partnerships were often viewed as a handoff: a small company advanced an asset, and a larger company stepped in later. Increasingly, the better model is to bring complementary capabilities together earlier.
For platform companies like AmacaThera, that is especially important. Partners may bring deep experience in a specific therapeutic area, clinical development, manufacturing, regulatory strategy, market access, or commercialization. The opportunity is to combine those capabilities in a way that accelerates development and expands what a therapeutic can do.
We are also seeing more flexible structures: feasibility work, research collaborations, co-development, and licensing. Those models allow both sides to learn quickly and de-risk the path forward. The best partnerships are not just financial transactions. They help determine whether a product can deliver meaningful clinical benefit, fit the realities of healthcare delivery, and create value that supports adoption.
Arya Mehrabanzad, Principal, Ampersand
The most consequential shift is geographic. Chinese biotechs have become a primary source of licensed assets, particularly in ADCs and increasingly in others (e.g., metabolic disease, CNS, and autoimmune programs). What began as an oncology story has expanded rapidly, and we’re seeing Western players take notice as the number of out-licensed assets from China continues to climb. This has major implications for both sponsors and tools/services companies and will be a major dynamic to watch in parallel with the longer-term impacts of the BIOSECURE Act.
The second major change is in how AI is impacting partnership strategies and the pursuit and structuring of data licenses. Technology-biopharma deals look very different from traditional licensing deals, and we’re seeing some unique models emerging across the landscape that are creating blueprints for the future of the industry. Tempus’ deals, Lilly’s TuneLab announcement and integration with other platforms, and a variety of other enterprise AI and model licensing agreements being announced almost weekly are changing the landscape of discovery. And if that isn’t exciting enough, we’re also seeing traditional tech companies placing major bets in the life sciences (e.g., NVIDIA, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) that are likely to play a meaningful role in shaping the future of partnership models and development.
A third dynamic we’re seeing is the blurring of lines between CROs and CDMOs as service providers further integrate end-to-end capabilities to best serve their clients.
Newsletters
Receive the latest pharmaceutical news, personalities, education, and career development – weekly to your inbox.
