Ep1: Transatlantic Investing and Fund II Strategy, with Panakes Partners

[00:00:00] Henry Peck: Hey everyone, it's Henry. Welcome to Emerging Medtech Today by LSI. Today I'm joined by Diana and Alessio of Panakes Partners, and we touch on everything from the learnings from their first 75 million euro fund that they're carrying into fund two, the current market conditions and challenges faced by medtech and health tech companies, and how opportunities in medtech and health tech are juxtaposed in the US and across Europe. Enjoy.

[00:00:29] Henry Peck: Diana, Alessio, thank you so much for joining me. We'd love to have you introduce yourselves to the audience and give us a little bit of an intro on Panakes Partners, your first fund, and the learnings from that first fund that you're carrying into the second fund.

[00:00:43] Diana Saraceni: Hi, Henry. Hi, everyone. Diana Saraceni here. Together with Alessio, we co founded Panakes, managing directors of the firm. And I have 23 years of venture capital experience. I also co founded another venture capital firm quite some time ago, called 360 [00:01:00] Capital. And I've been active in the field for, of medtech specifically for the latest 10 years or so.

[00:01:09] Alessio Beverina: Thanks, Henry. Hi, everyone. I'm Alessio Beverina. I'm an engineer in background. I co founded, as Diana said, Panakes back in 2015. Prior to that, I was a research engineer in a lab and then worked for 10 years at Sofinnova Partners out of Paris, and working hard in order to make Panakes' funds number one, number two successful in the future.

[00:01:33] Alessio Beverina: The first fund was raised in a different environment back in 2015. It took us a long time to raise because it was a first time team, first time fund, but we were successful in raising 75 million euros. It was a fund dedicated only to medtech that was invested in the last five years in 12 companies.

[00:01:54] Alessio Beverina: Certainly, we have done a lot of investment in different [00:02:00] subsector of the medtech environment from surgical equipment to oncology to diagnostics et cetera. But what we learned was pretty clear. First of all, probably there are subsector in the method that are not as sexy as we thought at the beginning, in particular, surgical tool other than the robotics diagnostics. So we may consider that in the future and I hope that Diana will be happy to explain, uh, what is the strategy of the second fund. We will not make tons of investment in that particular sector.

[00:02:34] Alessio Beverina: Second key learnings was the fact that it takes a long time to develop a company, in particular in medtech, which means also lots of money compared to what we previously thought was needed to get to do an exit point.

[00:02:50] Alessio Beverina: Third point key learnings is that we understood, because time has passed, that the big corporates, the strategics that [00:03:00] are the target for acquisition of our portfolio company, are requesting more and more things, in particular a commercial traction at the beginning.

[00:03:10] Alessio Beverina: Finally, I believe that also, uh, we had the several company with partnership with corporates, meaning a distribution agreement. And this has to be thought widely, highly in the future, because not necessarily a partnership with the strategic makes an exit successful at the end of the day. Because corporates are not easy to work with small startup, even if there is a contract in place. I don't know if Diana want to add anything on the key learnings.

[00:03:45] Diana Saraceni: On the exciting part, maybe. We had key learnings on things that, uh, produced different outcomes in the bad, but also in the good. And on the good side, we learned that some, for example, for some asset, the [00:04:00] excitement generated in the segment can create big opportunities for the company to raise money, increase the valuation, and have huge opportunities.

[00:04:09] Diana Saraceni: We also learned that when you have comparables in the IPO market that produce great market capitalization, even in the early days without revenues, then that's where you can trigger exit pre revenues, which is great, you don't have to go through the effort of raising the money and produce commercialization. And a few other exciting stories that we have that we're also learning for the better than what we have planned.

[00:04:35] Henry Peck: Well, congratulations on deploying the first fund and on raising fund two. You talk about some of those learnings that you're carrying through working with the strategics and thinking about comparables in the public markets and how that can feed into the valuations and momentum for early stage companies.

[00:04:50] Henry Peck: I'm curious now with fund two, what's the new strategy? What are you taking from that first fund into fund two, and particularly, what are you most interested in looking at in this new fund? [00:05:00]

[00:05:00] Diana Saraceni: Well, yes, let's start with the, with the basics of the new fund. It's kind of a very exciting time here at Panakes with a hundred and seventy five million new fund to deploy that had just a final closing, went oversubscribed. We have lots of, uh, strategics as investors in our fund. There's a kind of an overlap with the first fund in the sense that, uh, most of it will be focused on medtech, mostly pan-European companies, but also we have some allocation for outside of Europe. And I mean, early to late, we're open to tickets in the range of anything between minimum of 2, 3 million up to 10, given the higher capacity of this fund.

[00:05:44] Diana Saraceni: With this fund, we also added biotech to it, and I mean, it will be also interesting to look at opportunities where there is product combination where medtech and biotech both some components. And as [00:06:00] Alessio said, as kind of learnings from the first fund, we are going to be very focused on devices when they bring a sort of therapeutic benefit to the patient. And this also will kind of overlap with the, with the biotech strategy, which is about treating patients, curing patients just with two different angles.

[00:06:19] Henry Peck: And when you talk about the investing geographies that you're looking at, you talk about mainly focusing in Europe or having an allocation for outside of Europe, let's focus on Europe first. And obviously one of the big seminal events in European medtech has been the, the MDD-MDR shift, and that's affected how medtech companies in Europe are going to be capitalized, develop their technologies and commercialize from the earliest stages all the way through growth. And I'm curious how you are looking at the change in that landscape and how it may be affecting the behavior of companies in your portfolio, how you're thinking about investments and how you're thinking about capitalizing companies in the early stages.

[00:06:59] Alessio Beverina: [00:07:00] Let's start saying that if you look back at five, 10 years ago, all American company were coming to Europe in order to get the CE-mark first in order to demonstrate the technology and usability from the patient perspective, then they were going to the United States doing the clinical trial to get the FDA.

[00:07:20] Alessio Beverina: As of today, in particular, on the more invasive kind of technology, cardiovascular neurology, et cetera, companies are not going anymore to Europe first. It will be US first because of the difficulties the MDR has caused to all the environment.

[00:07:37] Henry Peck: Even the companies in Europe are going FDA first.

[00:07:40] Alessio Beverina: Even companies in Europe are going US first, yes. Because in particular, if you are targeting an invasive kind of solution, right, cardiovascular, neurology, et cetera, et cetera. So the point is that, you know, if before, from an investment perspective, what has been changed is that essentially the [00:08:00] first check that we are putting inside the company that were normally get to the CE mark are now much larger because you want to demonstrate through the FDA.

[00:08:11] Alessio Beverina: So clinical trying the FDA as we know, it's much more expensive than doing that in Europe. So the overall effect that you invest more money at the beginning at a higher risk in order to get to the milestone, which is the clinical validation and then the FDA.

[00:08:28] Alessio Beverina: Certainly, you know, this is a very sad to say for the European patients. But also for a European company because they need, from day one, structure, a strategy towards the United States and towards the FDA. And in particular, again, from an investment perspective, more money in at the beginning at higher risk compared to what was the case before.

[00:08:53] Alessio Beverina: Little addition point to the MDR or the way the notified body are working in [00:09:00] Europe in comparison to what the FDA does in the United States. Notified body Europe are not working in, in a propositive way towards the startups and the corporate. So, you cannot have an interaction with that. These days, even more in the last years, FDA has been open to a dialogue with the startups. And this makes it special for a company, you know, you don't know what is the right strategy, going for a clinical trial, what is the number of patients, what is the, the core that you need to do by discussing with the FDA in a proactive way through calls before the submission makes things extremely easy. In Europe, everything is out of nowhere. So you don't know what is notified body is going to ask till you ask.

[00:09:54] Henry Peck: Interesting. And when we talk about FDA, CE mark, I think we have a tendency to kind of look [00:10:00] at those two things as two sides of the same coin. But, as we know for European investors like yourselves, Europe is not as homogenous maybe on the outside as the United States seems, right? There could be a tremendous difference between being an early stage company in Germany and France versus New York and New Jersey. And so, Diana, I'm curious, do you see differences in the outlook and strategy for early stage companies when you look at two major geographies like Germany and France in Europe, or is it fairly homogenous?

[00:10:31] Diana Saraceni: No, actually, there are a big difference around Europe. I would say there are big difference around the US too, but let's stick to Europe as your main question. There are big difference around Europe and mostly, I mean, I can see at least two reasons and they're both related to the kind of ecosystem that is developed in a country or another.

[00:10:51] Diana Saraceni: First of all, the financing. The liquidity available for early stage medtech companies is very different from a country to [00:11:00] another around Europe. The second being the cost, the level of cost you have to undertake for HR is very different. It can be twice as much, uh, depending on the geography. So for whatever is, um, for engineers, for clinical directors, resources, and also to run clinical studies can be very different level of cost. So at least these two will generate dramatic difference around Europe. But I would say the US is not very different to go back to my point.

[00:11:33] Henry Peck: Certainly you see definitely differences for cost of talent between say the coastal cities and the middle of the country. And that's definitely been something that I think has been challenged with the post COVID remote work as people start to disperse.

[00:11:46] Henry Peck: And obviously maybe a little easier to do at a digital health company than something with a hardware component in more of a traditional medtech venture. Alessio focusing on digital health and health tech, is that same homogeneity present in Europe [00:12:00] with digital health companies the way it is with medtech companies? Or are there special or different considerations for digital health in Europe across different geographies?

[00:12:09] Alessio Beverina: I believe there is differences among the different European countries on how the, the digital therapeutics or digital companies are, in the healthcare are progressing. So first of all, we need to separate between the different kind of sub-sector in the digital healthcare. Either you are in the software for clinician or putting the relationship with the doctors and the patient, et cetera, et cetera. Or you have a fantastic software of AI for clinical trial, et cetera. Or you have a digital therapy.

[00:12:40] Alessio Beverina: So all of these make things completely different. So I do believe that in Europe, in country like France and Germany, startups will have a huge advantage. Why so? Because in particular in Germany, they have done something very smart and [00:13:00] unique, which is an early reimbursement of digital therapeutics product done essentially by startups without the need of clinical proof of their therapy, which means that the company can start selling and get reimbursed by the health care system or insurance early on.

[00:13:20] Alessio Beverina: While doing so, they can start doing the demonstration phase. So if I go back to the key learning things that we have been talking about at the beginning, we would look at over 600 opportunities between 2016 and 2021, in Europe, in digital therapy. There was very little with any proof, any reimbursement, any execution on the commercial traction.

[00:13:46] Alessio Beverina: From 2021, 2023, now we see lots of opportunity that has gone through the DiGA, the German way of doing reimbursement, that has allowed them to get early proof of [00:14:00] their clinical interest for the patient at the end of the day and getting early revenue. This makes things much interesting. Then you can have the clinical proven product and moving to the other European country or United States.

[00:14:17] Alessio Beverina: In France, they have done another interesting thing as well. Absolutely unique as well, which is related to the digital monitoring solution, which are early days reimbursed as well, like in Germany, but not for therapy, it's for monitoring. So it's a different piece and can make company, or make an early revenue, early interest from the doctors and from the old ecosystem. And then once demonstrated on a smaller scale and in a country like France, go to the bigger market like United States.

[00:14:48] Alessio Beverina: Certainly the fact that Europe is so different country by country in terms of how the doctor is paid, how the relationship with the doctor and the patient is done, [00:15:00] how their reimbursement is done, make Europe a little bit more complex than the United States.

[00:15:05] Alessio Beverina: And if you look, all the major successful digital company in the healthcare are American one working in the American sector. Then there are other sector where Europe is pretty smart in the digital effort, like AI for the clinical trial that I've been mentioning before. I think that there are lots of company based on the mathematical knowledge, which is pretty strong in Europe that are able to build up fantastic algorithm in order to identify fantastic molecules in the discovery phase that can be working with the interesting pharma globally, not only the European one, but also in the States.

[00:15:47] Henry Peck: Diana, we talked about medtech across different European geographies, but how do you think about medtech in the US versus the EU the way that [00:16:00] Alessio was explaining some of the success profiles and differences between digital health companies in the Us. and the EU?

[00:16:07] Diana Saraceni: Well, I would say that the picture is kind of similar in also given what we just discussed about the new MDR affecting the complexity of clinical trials and regulatory path and mean producing as a result, what happens is that many companies do run a joint regulatory path combining, trying to combine FDA requirements and, and CE marking, especially class three devices.

[00:16:35] Diana Saraceni: I think it's the situation also in terms of, um, capital availability for companies is quite similar, uh, regulatory wise we just discussed. And I would say that also, um, valuation wise at the moment, there are some similarity. There used to be a time where European companies were much cheaper. Now I have to say that we can see valuation have leveled [00:17:00] up with the US companies.

[00:17:01] Diana Saraceni: I mean, good companies, when they have strong products that, for example, produce a therapeutic benefit. They don't have issues being European or a US company to increase their valuation over time, producing clinical results, for example. So that is really happening on both sides of the ocean. So I would say that the sector is quite homogeneous. I don't see big difference at the moment.

[00:17:29] Henry Peck: What drove that leveling of valuations across both sides of the ocean, as you say?

[00:17:35] Diana Saraceni: It's certainly what happened after, uh, 2021, uh, after the sort of, uh, the hype time for the sector affected most of U. S. company valuations. So investors there are just prepared to reduce significantly their, any kind of requests in follow up rounds as was a result of the public markets, of course, and that [00:18:00] resulted in leveling up with the European companies, I believe.

[00:18:03] Henry Peck: So the U. S. valuations come down post that hype cycle, bringing them more in parity with what had been happening in Europe.

[00:18:11] Diana Saraceni: In a stronger way, yes, more than what happened to the European companies.

[00:18:16] Alessio Beverina: Henry, if I may, probably, you know, uh, I would like to say that in Europe, we didn't see much of a huge change in valuation, in particular on the seed on the series A. And even on the series B, probably because we were always reasonable, we didn't see much of that. What Diana mentioned about the craziness sometimes of American company in terms of valuation, it's real, right? Because there is probably lots of money available that there are. targeting the super high company that cannot make it afterwards. So if the company cannot make it, you know, and the valuation is still high, you know, you get screwed at the end of the day. In Europe, we didn't see yet. Probably [00:19:00] we will have a six months, a one year delay as usual. The roller coaster in Europe is smaller than the American roller coaster.

[00:19:09] Henry Peck: Everything in America when it comes to roller coasters is going to be bigger. The theme parks, the food at the concession stand, it's all going to be bigger. And the valuations seem to be no exception there. I'm curious, you talk about this big hype cycle that happened in 2021 and this kind of reckoning for companies that had gotten these large valuations and talk to me a little bit about the investors that were a part of those companies and are now looking at those follow on rounds that you mentioned, for companies that raised in those bigger hype cycles, what are you hearing from investment partners, syndicate partners in those spaces who participated in company rounds at valuations like that on the other side of the ocean? And how is that maybe affecting the thinking going forward for American, European, and transatlantic investing at large?

[00:19:58] Diana Saraceni: The smart one who have [00:20:00] kept resources, financial resources aside, they are not going to be too affected right, I mean, they can afford to go through down rounds and just follow up so that they basically are not affected as a result. That's a smart way to do, you have to be in this business and understand that this is mandatory to keep reserves and to offset any of these cycles.

[00:20:23] Diana Saraceni: So when there are smart investors in company, they're nothing really happened, they just resized. expectation to go after lower valuation. And that's it. The problem is more when, I mean, there are private investors, some of private investors, not to say that they're not smart, but just to say that some inexperienced private investors sometimes do the mistake to say, well, that's so one time investment that we're not going to follow up, and then they are affected by everything that happens afterward.

[00:20:55] Alessio Beverina: By adding a little comment, I do believe, like Diana said, that the [00:21:00] smart investor, will put research and suggesting their entrepreneur, the CEO of their company, to start the fundraising early on, or so it takes longer time, even if you look at the liquidity out there, the dry powder, as we say in our business is still huge, available for the company.

[00:21:23] Alessio Beverina: Investors are becoming cautious and probably trying to leverage their power with the money and decreasing the valuation over time. So this suggestion of smart VC are giving the reserve and go fundraising, even if you have 80 million in the bank, because this is the, you know, you take longer time in order to create interest from the actual investor.

[00:21:50] Henry Peck: So there's money available, but companies need to be smarter in when they start their fundraising and how they run their process with a longer time horizon in mind [00:22:00] to plan for what has been a correction in the market condition and what is ultimately affected, investor perception of their company and investor behavior, when looking at their overall fund and amount of capital.

[00:22:11] Alessio Beverina: Absolutely.

[00:22:12] Henry Peck: Great. We talked about health tech and medtech investing in Europe and the US. And I'm curious within that same fund, how you're thinking about those two segments, similarly, differently, and how you're managing deal flow, investment propositions and opportunities in those different spaces together. So, Alessio, starting with you, talk to me about health tech and digital health right now in Europe, in the U. S., and the spaces or opportunities, clinical needs, the places where you're seeing high opportunity for digital health and health tech to make an impact, where you're looking at fund two as a way to participate and drive that impact.

[00:22:52] Alessio Beverina: So first of all, let me say that, uh, since we are investing in the fund, we need to talk the same language [00:23:00] inside the partners in the firm. So very often we talk about the clinical evidence or demonstration, we talk about regulatory approval, we talking about IP.

[00:23:12] Alessio Beverina: In the digital healthcare space, often, there is no such things. So where we are trying to focus in ourselves is more related to the company that's very similar to the biotech and the medtech investment that we are normally used to do. So the company that have a very interesting solution, even if it's software instead of the piece of hardware, it's okay. That's all the real medical need that is unsolved as of today.

[00:23:42] Alessio Beverina: Second, they need to have some initial proof of a demonstration on the clinical side. And third, they need to have an ambition to become a large company with a large ambition targeting all the market. So if you're talking about [00:24:00] the patient doctor software, I don't think we are going to make this kind of investment. It's kind of ERP in the software business. If you're talking about, uh, other kind of smart solution to get the data out of the iPhone through a ring or wristband, I don't think we are going to make it.

[00:24:19] Alessio Beverina: But where the company is targeting something very similar to what we are doing elsewhere, I think it's going to be our interest. And as I said before, you know, in particular in Germany, there are lots of companies that have been applying to DiGA, and they've been able today, not yesterday, but today, they've been able to demonstrate that there is a clinical interest for such a solution.

[00:24:43] Alessio Beverina: Moreover, the digital piece could be added to the pharma products. So if you are using the digital piece, an app, software, call it as you want, to attach to a drug that can deliver much more interesting data [00:25:00] for the patient. And then for the pharma, I think we are getting to something real. But again, it's a question of ambition, it's a question of target, it's a question of a met clinical need, again and again and again. So this is where we are going to put our effort. I hope we will be able to make one investment. We have not done anything in with the first fund, but I'm sure that there will be something of strong interest.

[00:25:27] Alessio Beverina: On top of the, as I said before, artificial intelligence, different kind of algorithm, machine learning, et cetera, dedicated to the discovery phase in drug is something of interest. Even if I have to say that it's very complicated to identify the good ones, because it's very rare that somebody has everything already demonstrated. So in this case, it's very useful to a team inside Panakes with the mixed knowledge on the biotech side, know to [00:26:00] understand what are the drugs and how the drugs behave, what are the mechanism of action, how they can interfere. And on the other side, people in the medtech like myself, and Diana, that are able to understand what are the pathology that can be useful for such a technology.

[00:26:17] Henry Peck: Interesting. You mentioned AI driven drug discovery as one of those areas for high opportunity, and I think we've seen a lot of excitement and a lot of noise in the AI driven everything in healthcare, whether that's in discovery, diagnosis, treatment, clinical workflows, patient experience, there seem to be more and more opportunities where AI is showing potential to make an impact in healthcare.

[00:26:42] Henry Peck: With this new fund, as you're thinking about digital health and health tech and that overlap with AI, how are you making sense of everything that's happening in the AI world as a way to inform your investment theses, evaluate companies, and just make sense of that landscape? [00:27:00]

[00:27:00] Alessio Beverina: First of all, I think that there's been four or five years that people have been starting talking about the AI in healthcare, which is very different from the chat GPT kind of hype of these days.

[00:27:12] Alessio Beverina: So for what concern the first target AI, it's for imaging, diagnosis and monitoring, and I think here there is clear need and a clear technical solution to solve this kind of problem, right? Doctors can be replaced by a software because you see more picture of the cancer than doctors. It's easy, easy training.

[00:27:39] Alessio Beverina: But on that particular case, I think that there will be a business model issue one day in the future, because, you know, there are hundreds of companies developing AI for imaging, for example. But you know how they get to all the data around the world unless they are in a machine that does the x ray or the echo or et cetera, [00:28:00] et cetera, CT scan.

[00:28:01] Alessio Beverina: So I think there is certainly need, certain working paradigm, but there will be a very difficult business model. On the AI for the discovery, I mean, there are many companies that are working even in Europe on the development of particular AI and algorithm to make early discovery, because, you know, it's much faster to look at the data is smarter and to take a decision out of it.

[00:28:31] Alessio Beverina: Certainly we need to see a proof. Today, we are not at that stage. So there are a lot of startups company working with big pharma company receiving tons of money also from VC, but also from the corporate as a working money. I know that to demonstrate that, I think that in the next five to 10 years, we will have probably the first drugs that have been discovered by AI. And we hope that the one will be one of our company portfolio.

[00:28:59] Alessio Beverina: And as I [00:29:00] said before, you know, sometimes it's tricky to identify the right company because you need to have on one side, the biology knowledge and the other side, you need to have the mathematical knowledge. And on top of that, there is a business model. Are you wanting to go as a service company or you want to become yourself a biotech company developing your own drug? Because probably the value out of it is much larger. So there are a lot of moving piece today on this particular sector of AI.

[00:29:32] Alessio Beverina: But you know, forget about the chat GPT. I don't think the chat GPT is, for the time being, for what we have seen today, at least in Europe, unless you're talking about their relationship with the patient or trying to have a direct discussion with the chat GPT in order to know if you are sick or not, I don't think we are here there yet. On the other side, yes, there are absolutely many companies that are developing, I'm sure that many of them will be successful in [00:30:00] the future.

[00:30:01] Henry Peck: Makes sense and Diana, I'm curious on your side, you know, as you juxtapose again, what's happening in health tech and digital health with medtech and try and share that common language amongst the investors internally, what's exciting you in medtech right now? What spaces, technologies are you looking closely at with this new fund and thinking are areas that are ripe for innovation?

[00:30:23] Diana Saraceni: Well, we keep a focus on a couple of areas that were successful with the previous fund and keep being very interesting. I mean, one of which is anything in cardiovascular, of course, is cardiovascular is a very interesting segment because there are market size, unfortunately for patient when market size is quite big, almost any time. And also because there are a certain number of acquisition that are happening just pre revenues. And that's always exciting for investors who don't have to finance the commercial stage of their companies.

[00:30:57] Diana Saraceni: Another sector we were already exposed with the [00:31:00] first fund and keep searching for new investment is anything that's oncology and that goes through devices, which can be either drug delivery or kind of more local approaches to tumor treatment. This is something that we are also very interested. Anything that's in the diagnostic space for those pathologies is always very interesting where you can improve diagnosis by a cost factor or efficacy, of course.

[00:31:28] Diana Saraceni: And maybe one space that is, was already again addressed with the first fund, but it's becoming um, harder and harder is, uh, anything in neuro tech. And that is also including a certain number of segment. You have neurostim that is part of it. And that's not only for pain treatment, but also for anything that's, for example, again, companies like one now portfolio of the first fund that's, uh, more neuromodulation, the neurostim that's using ultrasound, a neuromodulation to open the blood brain [00:32:00] barrier. That is a platform technology, very interesting to, um, increase, enhance drug delivery into the brain. Uh, any innovation around the brain, most of the time is interesting, I have to say.

[00:32:12] Diana Saraceni: And then obviously, again, in diagnostic, anything that's diagnostic around neurology or psychiatric, most of the time is introducing some concept and some biomarkers that are badly needed in pathologies which are otherwise just measured with some kind of qualitative clinical symptoms.

[00:32:34] Alessio Beverina: If I may add, Henry, my beloved robotic surgical equipment piece, where Europe has demonstrated over the last five years to have been capable of creating interesting company, uh, CMR, RoboCat, Precise, Ganymed, DistalMotion, all company that are targeting different kind of subsector [00:33:00] um, in this surgical robotic environment, you know, not the necessarily laparoscopic, but you know, they can go for brain, they can go for cardiovascular ophthalmology, microsurgery in the case of our portfolio company, MMI, etc.

[00:33:14] Alessio Beverina: So there is the capacity in Europe to create a good leader in this particular sector, also because, as Diana say at the beginning, the overall cost of developing it, it's lower. You need a lot of resources in terms of human being, because you need to develop the software, you need to develop the hardware that are extremely complex to do it, and then you need to do the clinical regulator, etc, etc. So Europe has a clear edge on top of it. And I hope that any, some of this company that I mentioned before will be successful in the future as well.

[00:33:51] Henry Peck: Diana, you mentioned the neurology space and neurotech getting hotter and hotter, in your own words there, and I'm curious when I [00:34:00] spoken to neurology KOLs and companies in that space I've heard from one a great quote that I like to use and they said that what happened in oncology 10 years ago with respect to diagnostics, biomarkers, personalized treatment precision medicine, is going to happen in neurology in the next 20 years, and I'm very curious, are you seeing that? Is that something you buy into? Are there similarities in that shift?

[00:34:24] Diana Saraceni: Totally. Just to mention one of the biggest disease, if not the biggest disease by number of patient, unfortunately, which is Alzheimer. What is clear is that any drug being approved at the moment on the market, there were two of them approved by FDA in the last 18 months, basically what they do for the patient, they slow down the progression of the disease. Now, if you consider that slowing down the progression of the disease is only relevant if you can catch the disease early on in the process, then you see [00:35:00] immediately the similarity with oncology.

[00:35:02] Diana Saraceni: Most of the major improvement in oncology were about early diagnosis and prevention and be able to have treatment and surgery, and obviously also a drug treatment on patients early on in the process. And this is what's happening in neurology. And there will be more and more need of those biomarkers. Actually, we have invested in one, which is a very, very promising company, developing a biomarker for early detection of Alzheimer's, just to stick to the thesis.

[00:35:34] Henry Peck: We're extremely excited to have both of you join us at LSI Europe in September in Barcelona, Spain, and we're going to have both of you on panels speaking at this event. I'm curious, by September, in just a few months, what will we be discussing then? What's going to be really important for our global community of innovators, investors, and strategics to be thinking about, to be discussing, and analyzing, and hopefully [00:36:00] leave with new insights and learnings on to better grow their businesses and make an impact on healthcare globally?

[00:36:07] Diana Saraceni: Well, I want to be optimistic and say that we're going to discuss about the full market recovery in a few months.

[00:36:14] Henry Peck: I hope.

[00:36:15] Diana Saraceni: I'm just talking about public markets, of course, because I mean, there's no much recovery in private markets. But public market would be good to see, um, that we're back to what we have seen in 2020, 2021, to some extent, also beginning of 2022, and that would be great for the sector to be able to have early stage IPOs and alike, and give the opportunity to many companies to raise the capital they need to further develop.

[00:36:45] Henry Peck: Let's hope.

[00:36:46] Alessio Beverina: 100% in agreement with Diana, as usual. I hope that, you know, after these 12, 18 months of pause, because the market was down, there was a lot of stress [00:37:00] or impatiency, et cetera, et cetera, the market will recover. And we can see already these days, there are a lot of companies that are able to raise funds, reasonable funds.

[00:37:11] Alessio Beverina: So I hope that, uh, in September, the bad environment is passed away and we will be able to restart doing business as well. And I hope that the exits either on the pilot market or an NMNA will restart as soon as possible.

[00:37:27] Henry Peck: Diana, Alessio, thank you so much.

[00:37:30] Diana Saraceni: Thank you, Henry.

[00:37:31] Alessio Beverina: Thank you, Henry. Pleasure.

[00:37:34] Henry Peck: Thanks for tuning in to Emerging Medtech Today by LSI. Be sure to subscribe on your favorite podcast player so you're automatically notified when there's a new episode. For more about LSI and the Emerging Medtech Today podcast, and to continue exploring our suite of videos, interviews, and other resources, visit Emergingmedtechtoday.com and find the link in the show notes.