Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A p p l i c a t i o n p e r i o d : 1 st J a n u a r y - 1 5 th F e b r u a r y
(17:30)
The BIG Philosophy
• S u p p o r t H i g h R i s k Te c h a t I d e a t i o n t o E a r l y S t a g e
• P u r s u e P r o m i s i n g Te c h w i t h I m p a c t f u l ! d e a
• E s t a b l i s h , U p s c a l e a n d Va l i d a t e P r o o f o f C o n c e p t ( P o C )
F o r t e c h n o l o g y c o m m e r c i a l i z a t i o n o f s a l e a b l e ( i m p l e m e n t a b l e ) L S , B T,
Bioengg. technology / products / services
N o R o y a l t y, i n t e r e s t e t c . c h a r g e d
Ty p i c a l b u d g e t h e a d s a r e :
- Manpower - Tr a v e l a n d r e l a t e d c o s t s
- IP costs - Contingency
Technical Support provided
B I R A C ’s a n d S I I C a s a B I G p a r t n e r p r o v i d e , a r r a n g e :
T h e B I G P r o j e c t R e v i ew, M o n i t o r i n g a n d E v a l u a t i o n
process
P r o v i d e a p p l i c a nt s , g r a n t e e s w i t h v a l u a b l e f e e d b a c k
comments and inputs from networks of experts
Who can apply?
stream
B . Te c h / M . Te c h / M S c / M P h i l / P h D / B . P h a r m a /
MBBS/BDS/MDes/MPH/MSW/MBA etc.
A f t e r s e l e c t i o n , Yo u m u s t p h y s i c a l l y I N C U B AT E
Call for Proposals
1 Jan 1 July
Opens
• Basic eligibility
BIG Partners assigned • Topics relevant to
proposals to review biotech/biomed
• POC project for tech vs.
basic research
Preliminary screening
by BIG Partner Proposal
not
eligible
BIG Partner requests
reviewers to
evaluate Application
process
Slide 1 of 4
• Novelty or unmet need
• Technical feasibility of idea;
do-ability; any prelim
indication that it might work
Receipt of • Can the team deliver?
reviewers Proposal Technical capability. Project
comments mgmt experience
not
• Potential to create IP or
eligible existing IP; Estimate of FTO
2 neg/ 2 based on reviewer’s
Proposal 2 neg/ 3 experience.
recommended to • Can the project achieve
impt goals in 18 months and
BIRAC Rs 50 lakhs? Are budget and
2 pos/ 2; 2 pos/3 timelines realistic?
BIRAC shortlists
applicants for
presentation to
TEP in Delhi Application
process
Slide 2 of 4
• Novelty or unmet need
• Technical feasibility of idea
• Technical credibility of PI
Presentation in • Proposal budget/timelines
Delhi to TEP. realistic
Decision by ESC
Proposal ~ 15 May ~ 15 Oct
not
selected
In principle
approval decision ~ 1 June ~1 Nov
by ESC
Agreement
signed between
Grantee and
BIG Partner
First installment
~ 1 Sept ~1 Mar
released by BIG
Partner.
BIG Project can Application
begin. process
Slide 4 of 4
Evaluation Criteria
Criteria Percentage (%)
Te c h n i c a l F e a s i b i l i t y 10
Novelty 20
Potential Impact 15
Commercialization Strategy 15
Te a m 20
Barriers 10
BIG project plan 10
Indicative Evaluation Criteria: !dea to Commercialization
• Cur r ent f ield k nowledge : pr elim inar y data
• >1 significant novel component
• Cogent tec hnic al ar gum ents , pr opos al - - -
- Reduce a national dependence
Reas onabl e tec hnic al c laim s
- PO C dem o s trateg y s c ientif ic m ethod on a monopoly producer
- Meets important national
priorities
Technical - New IP creation potential
feasibility Novelty
of the idea (20%)
(10%)
• - Significant commercial
• End- produc t/s erv ic e -
Potentia l c us tom ers -
Importance and/or - environmental impact
Commercialization
strategy (15%) and potential P. - Potential solution for
Value ac c r uing to
impact (15%)u outstanding mark et / society ne
c us tom er
- Need
- Value pr opos itio n vs
other of f er ings availab l e
- Large Mark et addressed
• BIG13:
-Dengue detection strip,
- M i c r o T u m o r Te k ,
-Intrinsic fluorescence based cancer
diagnostic
- Bioleather from flower waste
Basic needs of any startup venture
Fund
Mentor
Prototyp
e
Network
Funding
• Business Mentors
Dr. Arjun Surya Mr. Ajit Gill Mr. Biplab Mr. Srikant Dr. Saurabh
Chief Scientific Pharmaceutical Paul Sastri Srivastava
Officer, CuraDev Development Founder Founder Chairman CA
Biopharma Pvt. Executive Naireeta crayondata, India
Ltd Director, NeKtar services Angel Founder
Therapeutics (Bhungroo), investor NASSCOM,
Scientific Angel Investor crayondata,
Advisor, LAXAI Angel
investor
Mentoring
• Business Mentors
Mentoring
• Alumni Network…
• Angels Investors
• Ve n t u re c a p it a lis t s
• Management firms
• Government administration
• Medical Colleges
• Clinical validation
• Design alpha
• D-Rev
Networking
Biodesign
Clinical Immersion Program
IITK KGMU Joint Initiative
Doctor Talk Series
Contact Us:
bioincubator@iitk.ac.in
udayanc@iitk.ac.in
9899091984
C e r v i s c o p e TM Te c h n o l o g y D e s c r i p t i o n
• Trust Worthy (96% Specific & 91% Sensitive)
• A P P L I C AT I O N :
•
Need of early detection of cervical cancer
Estimated Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence (WHO, 2012 ):
➢ Wo r l d w i d e 4 th m o s t c o m m o n c a n c e r i n w o m e n
➢ estimated 5,28,000 new cases
➢ 2,66,000 deaths, accounting for 7.5% of all female cancer
deaths.
➢ India: estimated 1, 23, 000 new cases & 67, 000 deaths.
➢ A l m o s t 9 / 1 0 ~ ( 8 7 %) c e r v i c a l c a n c e r d e a t h s o c c u r i n t h e
less developed regions.
➢ If cervical cancer can be detected at early stage, it can be
cured.
➢A c o s t - e ff e c t iv e indigenous technology for early stage
detection that minimizes mortality due to cancer is
imperative. http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_cancer.aspx
N E E D O F T H E H O U R – M AR K E T S
C e r vi c a l c a n c e r s t a t i s t i c s
E a r l y c a n c e r d i a g n o s i s i s c r i t i c a l f o r s u c c e s s f u l c u r a t i ve
treatment
Need in India in the context of diagnostic devices:
• Affordable diagnostic devices
• Robust diagnostic techniques
• Accessibility in rural and far -flung areas
• B2G (CGHS, ECGHS) ; B2B (Hospitals, Pathology chains)
1. Bruni L, Barrionuevo-Rosas L, Albero G, Serrano B, Mena M, Gómez D, Muñoz J, Bosch FX, de Sanjosé S. ICO/IARC Information Centre on HPV and Cancer (HPV Information Centre).
Human Papillomavirus and Related Diseases in India. Summary Report 27 July 2017. [Date Accessed]
2. http://cancerindia.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Head_and_neck.pdf
MARKET INTEREST : M E D I C A L D E V I C ES I N I N D I A
CERVICAL CANCER
Scully C, Bagan JV, Hopper C, Epstein JB. Oral cancer: current and future diagnostic techniques. Am J Dent.
2008 Aug 1;21(4):199-209.
Ad v a n t a g e s o f t h e d e v i c e o v e r c o n v e n t i o n a l t e c h n i q u e s
Conventional method Limitations of conventional method Advantages of our device
Due to low sensitivity (55%) and high High sensitivity (91%) and specificity
specificity (97%) many abnormal (96%), minimizes either missed or
cases missed. overcalled cases.
1. Pap (Papanicolaou) Extra tests: HPV test, colposcopy or Pathology being a gold standard may
test repetition of Pap test may be required
be required in the initial trials.
.
Presently on the same day. Final
Generally it takes 7to 10 days to get
product results will be available
test results
immediately
High sensitivity (94%) and low High sensitivity (91%) and specificity
specificity (50%) indicates that many (96%), minimizes either missed or
cases are overcalled. overcalled cases.
2. Colposcopy If results are abnormal biopsy
directed Biopsy test No biopsy needed.
required.
Presently on the same day. Final
Colposcopy directed biopsy results
product results will be available
may take 25 to 35 days.
immediately
These tests are quantitative and not
These tests are subjective, with
subjective, and a medical person can
accuracies varying as per the skills of
comfortably use this set up with some
the examiner.
amount of training.
If a Pap test, colposcopy, and cervical
No biopsy needed to detect early stage
biopsy show different results, then
of cervical cancer.
COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE
Cervical cancer devices in the market Our Device(Cervical cancer probe)
Truscreen (Polartechnics Ltd., Australia)
• Patented device • Intrinsic fluorescence based
• Opto-electrical technique optical technique
• Available in India
• Sensitivity (CIN-1: 75.8%, CIN-2/3: 77.3%) & • More objective result compared to
Specificity(normal : 85.1%) visual examination based results of
• Price: Rs. 4,50,000/- most of the devices available in
Testing cost per patient: Rs. 4000/- market
LuViva (Guided Therapeutics, Inc, USA)
• Cost effective and portable device
• Patented device
• Reflectance and fluorescence spectroscopy technique
• Sensitivity (~ 80 %) & Specificity(~ 60%) CANCER SENSITIVITY SPECIFICITY
GROUPS
• Not available in India.
Normal vs 91% 96%
Sascan Meditech Pvt. Ltd, India CIN I/ CIN II
• Imaging device for oral cancer
• Fluorescence and Diffuse reflectance technique
• Testing going on in hospital
• Not yet available in market.
Conventional techniques
• Pap Smear: Sensitivity (55%) and specificity (97%)
• Colposcopy: Sensitivity (94%) and specificity (50%)
Development Status
Ex-vivo on hystorectomy and in-vivo studies
done
Earlier version made with Aluminium Currently being used for in-vivo
measurements in GSVM medical
college (Made with stainless steel)
Core IP of the Product
• Intrinsic Fluorescence
technique
Block diagram of the patented device
• A l g o ’s d e v e l o p e d a n d v a l i d a t e d
Diode laser (405nm)
• D e v i c e b a s e d o n M L / AI Al g o ’s
• Te c h n i q u e a n d d e v i c e p a t e n t e d Xe-lamp
60000
40000
Hardware Software Manpower 20000
~ Rs 60000 ~ Rs 20000 ~ Rs 15000 0
10 20 40 50 100
No of units produced
T E A M S TAT U S
➢ Te c h n i c a l E n g i n e e r i n g L e a d :
M e d Te c h D e v i c e D e v e l o p m e n t