Earlier this year, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Set barriers In the process of sequencing giant Illumina’s $7.1 billion acquisition of Grail, Grail is a healthcare company focused on early cancer detection. Importantly, it was spun off from the former in 2016.Currently, the European Commission (EC) is also Investigate the reasonableness of this transaction.
The FTC’s rationale for this initiative is to prevent the monopoly of innovation in the field of early cancer detection/liquid biopsy. Illumina is a leader in genome sequencing and in vitro diagnostics, and provides services to companies that develop cancer and infectious disease detection tests. The FTC’s concern is that if Illumina succeeds in this acquisition, it can kill Grail competitors that rely on Illumina sequencing equipment by increasing costs or isolating key services.
What does this mean for different companies in the companion diagnostics field? Although the current FTC’s decision not to immediately approve Illumina’s curved acquisition of Grail appears to be prudent and ethical, this may only be a standard procedure for a relatively new Democratic government, or it may be something else. If FTC is more insightful, it may first prohibit Illumina from creating Grail. It may also be that they do not have any jurisdiction over the equipment manufacturers that create customer-facing companies. From a business development perspective, Illumina just wants to diversify its products and develop an additional market.
Between 2016 and 2018, Grail has raised US$1.5 billion in venture capital funds. The important thing to note is that as Grail purchased their services and products, most of the money went to Illumina. All in all, Illumina has successfully created a feedback loop that allows capital to flow through Grail.Good part Grail’s $300 million Series A financing I went directly to Illumina.
Without the establishment of Grail, whether the financial landscape will expand in a similar way is a scenario we don’t know. The company was able to purchase Illumina equipment due to the large amount of private funds raised. Curiously, a top investment bank acted as a placement agent for Grail’s private financing. This is very unusual, especially for Series A financing, and asks a question: Compared with their policies and those of other top banks, did Illumina influence the bank’s decision to do so?
On the other hand, there are rumors that some other Grail investors are disappointed. [link?] The goal the company is trying to achieve—developing a test that can detect cancer from almost any tissue of origin—is an arduous task. Their method takes time.
In the past, precision science Publicly announced For several years, it has been interested in fecal-based colon cancer screening tests that cannibalize itself. Soon after Illumina bid for Grail, Exact announced plans to acquire Thrive for only $2.15 billion. Thrive’s pioneering early screening test CancerSEEK has data from an interventional study of 10,000 patients that uses mutation and protein biomarker methods to detect 10 different types of cancer. It is worth noting that two mature large companies see liquid biopsy as the future.
Illumina’s Grail bid is $7 billion. This price is partly determined by the valuation set in Grail’s private financing round. Skeptics may speculate that Illumina itself hopes that the FTC may prevent the acquisition.
The FTC has the right to review the proposed merger, suggest changes or directly prevent it from happening. Personally, as a veteran in this field, I don’t think that the supplier’s acquisition of customers is an important factor. Illumina wants to sell its equipment products. Even if Illumina is allowed to complete the acquisition, it may continue to be interested in selling its products to other customers.
What happens to Grail will depend on the company’s ability to generate highly sensitive and specific data through its methods. This is the deciding factor for any competitor in the field of medical diagnostics. Grail does not have any FDA-approved products or services that are commercially available. Therefore, the direct harm to consumers of the proposed acquisition cannot be a reason for the FTC’s review.
The capacity of new or next-generation devices may have become a crutch for some in the diagnostic industry. 30,000 sequences, multiple types of markers are being used and are possible. These methods significantly increase the evaluation time and cost. Fast turnaround time and low cost are critical to marketability, especially for early detection and diagnostic testing. In addition, these companion diagnostics (Dx) companies seem to rely too much on equipment and suppliers instead of contributing innovative breakthrough discoveries.
In contrast, before amplifying the mutant sequence, is it not important to apply biochemistry to accurately screen all non-tumor-related wild-type sequences from the sample? Innovators should pay close attention to science and try to eliminate variables through theory and research. This method will significantly reduce false negatives, increase sensitivity, and reduce sequencing time and cost. In many ways, the decision of the FTC or EC is not important. For those who still remember, the government once stipulated that when TV sets enter the market, movie studios can no longer own theaters.
Photo: Cooken, Getty Images
