Episode 141: From Bench Science to Biotech Investment and Venture Funding

Behind every successful biotech startup is a story of science, strategy, and investment. Today, we're going to explore all 3. You're listening to BIO from the Bayou, empowering biotech leaders with the tools, assets, and expertise to improve healthcare outcomes.

Each episode provides insights and information to expand your network, advance your product line, and help your company thrive.

Serving the entire Gulf South, but recorded in the heart of New Orleans. Welcome back to BIO from the Bayou. I'm your host, Dr. Elaine Hamm, the Executive in Residence at Tulane School of Medicine. And with me today's guest is Kevin White. He's the executive director of Berger Ingelheim Venture Fund. Welcome to the show, Kevin.

Thanks so much for having me, Elaine.

Well, so you have spent much of your career on the science side of drug discovery. So tell me a little bit about that, what you worked on, and then how you ended up on what some people would call the dark side, you know, industry, you know, but I feel like that's the light side and the, and the really important side right now as we're trying to actually fund the science we're all working on.

Yeah, for sure. So maybe I can start, I guess, which probably starts from my earliest memories, actually, of which most of those are science-themed, to be honest. It's zoos, it's museums. It's when I was young, breaking bones and understanding why they healed and how they healed so quick. So I would say I've always had a scientific curiosity. And when I speak with my parents, my mom, even when I was 4 or 5, and she would ask, what do you want to do when you grow up? It was a scientist.

Yeah.

has always been there and it's never changed. So it makes sense then, as I described to you, when I went through middle school and high school and then ultimately towards college, I wanted more exposure to science. And what science meant for me as I went through that journey was biology and human biology in the context of disease. So it was very natural for me, maybe in reflection, to select pharmacology at university when I studied there. It was amazing and it was probably my first exposure Although it was unintentional as to what drug discovery actually meant. So I had 4 wonderful years at the University of Glasgow in Scotland. You can probably tell I'm Scottish from my accent.

Not from the bio, no.

And I fell in love actually with science and drug discovery then. So I wanted even more exposure. So that then translated to a PhD in cell biology, which was focused at the time in human genetic diseases, but very much cell biology, and again, spent over 4 years doing my PhD and successfully defended that. And then 8 years or over 8 years was enough time at school. So I thought, let's do something a little bit different. So what that then transpired was to then take a postdoc. So I relocated to the US in the Northeast, which is where I live today at Harvard Medical School and studied a special non-coding RNA species called microRNA. And Spent a number of years doing that. The whole reason that I'm saying that is I spent a couple years really enjoying that and learning a little bit more about what being a researcher meant. But as I get more exposure in a full-time capacity at a global level, I would say, to research, I wanted to go back and understand drug discovery. So long story short from there is I went in a 15-year journey through the dark side, as you called it, Elaine, which was through Novartis R&D and then then later AbbVie R&D and really 15 years of learning more than science. It was the therapeutic application of science, what unmet clinical need looked like, what development looked like of a molecule, what regulatory aspects looked like, even what commercialization of launch looked like. So a lot of learning along the ways. And then in my last 2 years to 3 years, I started to be quite intentional about thinking for myself, what is next? As I had those discussions with my wife, of course, and my own mentor group, and I know we'll maybe speak through it, but I always had a lot of interest in what external innovation meant. And that's where these words like business development and licensing or venture started to really creep in. So I had some exposure and learned really what that meant. from the inside of pharmaceutical R&D. And it was just an amazing mechanism lever through which you could access innovation in a very nimble and agile way, which is something that is maybe a little bit more challenging in my experience from doing that from the inside of pharmaceutical companies.

And so, when you were in the pharmaceutical company, what were the different roles that you had then? Or was it mix of, you know, medical liaison? What was the different hats you wore?

So there was a number of different hats, and probably some of the listeners may be familiar with this trajectory. I started as just a naive scientist trying to understand what drug discovery meant. So it was a lab head role, building out a team focused in pure discovery research. So not too different from what would be, let's call it academic research. But of course, as roles change and Maybe things evolve and new opportunities open up within larger organizations. I then took on more responsibility. So, what that meant was drug discovery meant through, for example, to IND, was driving programs to there. And then, of course, clinical stage programs still are not all about execution. Sometimes they require a scientific mindset. So, they request some scientists to join those global project teams to input and help dissect the data and what this means. So, it was in those roles, the buzzword used in Arma is a word called cross-functional, and it really is by design cross-functional. So, I was always within discovery, or let's say the broader R&D organization, but it was, I guess, the exposure through some of these global project teams and these global initiatives that took place through which you could really— it opened my eyes, I would say that, as to what really— drug discovery and drug development meant just beyond the science and the discovery at the earliest stages.

You had a lot of different hats, but have they all been in the same general areas? Well, first I'm going to ask you, what was the title of your PhD defense? I mean, you work, you did your postdoc in microRNAs. Let's connect all of the scientific dots here.

Yeah. My PhD mentor is probably going to text me after this if I get it wrong, but it was dissecting the molecular basis of sex differences in pulmonary arterial hypertension. So this was a really fatal lung disease of which women were unfortunately way more susceptible to developing this than men. And it's an indication of which the survival rates are similar to some cancers out there. So unmet clinical need is huge. So that was the kind of PhD title, if you will. And then of course, the molecular aspect that I mentioned involved things like microRNA. So that was the transition down what I call the rabbit hole. into taking on a postdoc at Harvard Medical School and learning a little bit about that. And just to continue that thread, when I had transitioned out of Harvard Medical School and joined Novartis, I never knew it at the time, but they were very, very interested in microRNA therapeutics as a route towards treatment of lung diseases, which included pulmonary hypertension. So it was a really nice and easy scientific transition for me, if you will.

Yeah.

So there was less degrees of learning. I was learning other stuff, but maybe some of the core science scientific things were a little bit easier for me just to hold on through.

And so then Novartis AbbVie, same sort of buckets in terms of indication, or were you taking what you learned and having to apply it to something outside of pulmonary?

Yeah, I think if you were to have the discussion with me through that transition, I would have said I was swimming in a lot of cold water. I had transitioned out from, let's say, my knowledge space, which was respiratory and inflammation into broader immunology. That was a learning curve that I went through and needed to go through. So I was for sure learning what a new organization looked like, what a new biology looked like, what a whole new, let's call it therapeutic area looked like. So there was definitely a lot of learning that was taking place through that. transition. And again, this may or may not resonate with people, but I think being uncomfortable sometimes actually is a very, very important thing that people should go through. It's this kind of periodic shock therapy, as I tell and share with some of my mentees. And it is so, so important actually. Yeah. Yeah.

No, that's such a, I like the shock therapy aspect of it. I feel like every job I've ever had, I might have known how to do 50% of it, maybe even lower, to be honest, if I was being really honest with myself, some of those jobs. But, you know, I guess as a scientist, we sort of live in the knowledge that we, there's so much we don't know and you just kind of get okay with it. I'm just like, yeah, but I can eventually figure it out with, I, if I read enough papers and talk to enough people, I can figure it out. So.

Oh, totally. Totally. Yeah.

I love that. And in fact, I've been on the investment side myself, and that was such a big piece missing in my commercialization of of biotech, you know, background. I had gone on the tech transfer side, so I learned a lot about IP and how to translate from bench into preclinical to IND if we were lucky. But then the investment side was such a gap for me. And so I joined an investment firm really because I didn't know much about investing other than like, oh, this is good science and it, it has a shot, but what does that mean from an ROI perspective? And, and having to do the, the math behind it, which is something I just—

Yeah.

did not have any knowledge base. Did you feel the same way?

Yeah, as you're describing that, it's pretty much an identical journey through which I am going through.

Sure.

Yeah, you're still in it.

I'm currently on that journey. So again, it's whole new muscles that I've never stretched, to be honest. And I think it's uncomfortable stretching, but it's an important learning opportunity. And what I would probably say Is a huge learning for me, actually. Your comment around knowing less than 50% really resonated because I agree. I think for me, trying to learn in real time and do things as you work through is important. But what I would say honestly is I think if you have a conviction in wanting to learn, and as long as you kind of trust your instinct, let's say, and you have recent and previous experiences, I still think that you can learn a lot of this, but in the long term, for sure, and maybe develop an expertise that I experience over time. But in the short term, through the learning curve, actually, you can still be fairly effective and fairly impactful.

Well, yeah, because you've mentioned you're relatively new. So you just joined Boehringer Ingelheim's venture fund in December of 2025. So still drinking from the fire hose, as it were. Anything surprise you in your short time that you've been there on the venture side?

It's a good question. I think this may be a clear shout out to my colleagues actually, but it's a really pleasant surprise is that the support received from, let's say, the non-scientific functions, from which is the areas through which I'm stretching those muscles, has just been honestly amazing. And what I mean to call out is the finance team that I work with, the IP teams in the legal teams, just amazing network that exists within the fund and just huge experience in that space. So I think for me, that was a huge surprise, which I think is very welcome at this stage for me. And I think I have 2 others to call out just from my own kind of journey.

Yeah.

The other is just the exposure of the science that reaches you. There's just universes of science. I'll give an example that first thing this morning, I was chatting with a company focused on neuroinflammation, an area that let's say I could at least kind of move around and know a little bit of the basics given the immunology angle. But then it was a discussion straight into women's health.

Yeah.

And that's an area where for sure there's huge opportunity, but it's just a whole new area for me. And I don't understand a lot of those dimensions. So the universe of science and exposure to that can be a little bit daunting, I would say. And I'm still maybe trying to find my feet a little bit. And then the third surprise, maybe in reflection, less of a surprise is As I turn up as no longer Kevin the scientist at conferences, and I turn up with a badge that says investor around my name, people treat you differently. They do. There's no question. You're seen as the kind of bad egg where you are there to maybe have different motivations. And honestly, I try and emphasize this, and maybe this is the one thing that I would love to get across is I'm still the same Kevin from November 2025.

Yeah.

I'm still interested in the science, still curious to know, and really interested to understand and learn if there's ways that we can accelerate that towards clinic, and investment is that way to accelerate. So it's very much similar to how it's always been, but that was a third learning that I am going through.

Yeah. You're now the very, very popular kid at the table.

Yeah.

A lot of large pharmaceutical companies have venture arms, and they're all a little bit different. Some are very tied in with the pharma side, and they only invest in things that can go directly into the pipeline. Some are absolutely divorced from it, and they don't want to know what the pharma side is working on necessarily, so they can have that autonomy. Some are a little bit of both. Some lead investment rounds, some only follow. So talk to me a little bit about the ICE Venture Fund. We, we know a little bit being at Tulane because Faye has come and visited us, one of our mutual friends. Love Faye.

Yeah.

Shout out to her. She's been here and she's talked to many of our scientists. And so, it's probably evolved since she was here, which was probably about 3 years ago. So, love to know what you guys are up to now.

Yeah. And Fei is one of my superheroes, just put it out there.

She's amazing.

You're right. I think each pharma VC is a little bit different, but it's probably, let's say, within the same country or maybe continent. But the way that I describe BI's venture fund, it's like a long-distance relationship with a larger organization.

So, Got it. Okay. I've been through many of those. I'm curious. I haven't always had good, you know, long-distance relationships, but I'm curious to see this analogy here.

There's definitely a back and forward that takes place, and it's really important to understand that context. But let's say there's freedom to operate within the venture fund.

You're allowed to see other people is what you're saying, Kevin? Okay. Got it.

To try and explore, I would say, new investment opportunities. So the way that the fund kind of is operating I would try and answer through 2 ways. The first is if you just look at the portfolio on the website today, a lot of that is what I would define as really quite off-strategy investments compared to where we have approved medicines and/or clinical trials ongoing. And that is absolutely by design because part of the vision for the fund when it was built in 2015 was to, let's say, break new biology grounds and just break new grounds. So we were very intentional about maybe not making investments where we have existing infrastructure in place. We call that seismic investments. That's the internal lingo that we use. What is, and maybe the second answer is we are in the last 12 months or so, we're starting to revisit investments that are within existing therapeutic areas where we have infrastructure. So in other words, where we have approved medicines and/or active clinical trial investments, and we call those investments proximity investments. And the whole intent of those investments is just to learn and invest in areas where we are adjacent to and/or moving towards, to be honest. And it opens up a potential opportunity for us in future as to what that that asset or what that company or what that platform may look like. So to try and get a little bit specific, what that means for us is oncology, particularly solid tumors, immunology, respiratory, particularly lung fibrosis and fibrotic disorders, and cardiometabolic is a thematic area, which as I'm sure everyone knows, is a high area of interest. So if you were to put me on the spot in terms of quantify where we are thinking about investments. I would probably say we are going to try and move towards 50 to 75% proximity investments. So in those areas that I mentioned, and we still want to make sure that we are accessing what we call white space or open space, which are just these seismic opportunity investments.

That's great. It's kind of diversifying your own portfolio in that sense. And because You guys have invested in things that are really important, things like antimicrobial research and antimicrobial resistance. And that's such a huge unmet need that's looming over us like the Sword of Damocles a little bit. And I'm very glad that someone is investing in that. So my microbiologist says thank you. But I think it's really interesting as you think about moving forward, you've mentioned 2 things that kind of stuck out to me. Your original work was in sex-based medicine. Back in the day, that has become a huge topic these days. Not just the women's health piece, but just understanding, you know, the differences between males and females and medicine not always being— I mean, females weren't always included in clinical trials, et cetera, et cetera. And so we actually have a sex-based medicine center here at Tulane and also the fibrosis piece, because that's such a hard indication. Seems like you've kind of been at the forefront without realizing you've been at the forefront. scientifically, what else do you see as being sort of the interesting areas of science moving, you know, looking forward?

Yeah. So those, I guess, kind of trying to map it out, which is the, can be the challenging part for, let's say those frontier areas. I think definitely as we've been spending some time just learning about, let's say emerging areas, I think definitely women's health is an area where there's just historically, you're right. There's been underserved research dollars that's went in and the innovation I would say has historically moved at a lower rate than some of the other areas. I think that there's definitely some innovation that's happening even in the clinical trial space and in the regulatory space. Just to share one very specific example of that, we had the pleasure of attending a women's health summit last week that was co-hosted by Lilly and Pillar VC. So shout out to the organizers for that and just learning a lot about some of the innovation related to not just the biology, but even just the clinical development path and even the approval path for medicines and things like osteoporosis, for example. But just opening up huge opportunities, which of course is going to attract, or hopefully should attract investment dollars along the way. But for your question, areas outside that, I still think that there's a huge opportunity for areas where We can almost engineer out disease. So almost like a platform or therapeutic modality approach. And again, I'm going to give the boring answer, but reprogramming cells in the body is, is one that I have a little bit of experience with.

How is reprogramming cells boring? That's not boring at all. You forget who our audience is. Yeah.

Yeah. Well, in the context of investors, sometimes when you mention in vivo CAR-T, it's been around for quite a while. So maybe that's the The asterisks behind it. But I think an engineering-based approach becomes very attractive. For me, it's just hugely of interest. I also, I think depending what day you may ask me, I may give you a different answer, but I think age-related disorders and just healthy versus unhealthy aging is something that at some point there'll be a breakthrough moment and that'll be translated to a therapeutic mechanism and a treatment paradigm.

Yeah.

I think is of interest. And we see that, I go back to osteoporosis, but it is associated with age, of course, other factors, but these are the opportunities through which that there's potential something happening in that space as well. And then I don't want to just rhyme through areas, but just, I think targeted deliveries as a concept is just a very attractive one. And whether that's, let's say, getting it only where it needs to go so you can lower side effects. We're seeing that innovation in oncology, for example, but also let's say areas that we've historically never really been able to drug, let's say brain disorders as an example. We had seen that Denali's recent approval of a blood-brain barrier shuttled therapeutic becomes really interesting because it opens up this whole new way of thinking.

Yeah.

Can we target drugs to places that have really been tough to get to for a long, long time? And that then inspires things like next generation blood brain barrier shuttles. But I think the broader thematic area is a lot of interest, I would say, from certainly myself, the fund, but other funds in terms of targeted deliveries or ways to engineer out the immune system. And that can translate to many different indications, many different therapeutic areas.

Don't worry about— I mean, people are wanting this checklist, you know, of understanding sort of what are the areas of interest. And again, you're going to be the popular kid, you know, at the table. They want to know what they can come to. You with and what they should not come to you with. But I think that that gives a great explanation. I mean, I agree on the women's health front. Obviously I'm in the women's health. Well, obviously I'm a woman, but also I'm in women's health myself. We're actually, I'm moderating a panel at BIO this year, June 23rd at 3:00 PM at BIO in San Diego.

Oh, amazing.

On the Billion Dollar Frontier. That's a bold title I came up with. Just billion dollars, throw a B there, and we'll have Several groups, investors, Gates Foundation, talking about sort of the women's health. Because I think you're exactly right, like it's such white space, but there's so much we just don't know because we haven't spent a lot of time on it. But I think that there's at least the winds of change, I think, on that front.

Yeah, I completely agree. And maybe just to riff from something you mentioned, which your, let's say, lukewarm area is, I'm going to say something that may be a little bit contrarian, but I see a lot of pitches and I speak to a lot of companies and founders who bring forward the promise of AI.

Yep.

I don't doubt that that will revolutionize how we're doing pretty much everything. I see it in my daughter who's 13, how it's different from when I was 13. But I do think really reinforcing how AI can transcend as to what we're doing in the absence of AI, whether that's drug design, whether that's target at discovery and validation, whether that's speed to IND. I think for founders who are active in that space, trying to articulate in a meaningful way as to how AI has practically impacted that becomes very, very important because maybe it's a turnoff moment for me, but there's just, when I see AI, my eyes invisibly roll at times. Yeah, 100%.

Yeah, you're not alone in that. I mean, people were, they heard somewhere that someone got an investment because they put AI in their pitch deck and, and so therefore they found ways to integrate AI and that just doesn't do it anymore. That may have worked 3 years ago. That's not so much the case these days. Yeah. I mean, I, I like to use it as sort of an aside and, oh, by the way, we've also utilized AI, but not as a, as a main forefront on a pitch deck for sure. Yeah.

So yeah, and the final note, and maybe this is a call out, is I think if there's real case studies with proof of concept data showcasing the AI can absolutely impact, and I guess the area that I'm most passionate about is drug design. So how can we design a drug using AI that has never been really successfully fronteered before? I would love to learn and hear more about those companies. Absolutely. But I think just AIing.

Yeah.

Rebranding is something that investors, I think, are starting to get a little bit fatigued with.

I was going to say fatigue sounds like the word for sure. So, well, that's great. So are you going to be at BIO this year?

So unfortunately I have a conflict, so I won't be at BIO, but we do have a couple of members from the BI Ventures team turning up. So if there's anyone that's planning to go to BIO and are interested in just a meet and greet or They want to learn more about the venture fund, or they think they have an interesting story to tell, then of course I'm happy to make that connection and hopefully have a chance to meet some of the team members in person.

Sounds great. Thanks so much for talking with us, Kevin. We really appreciate you coming on the show and we'll be sure to keep an eye on BI Ventures and your work in the future.

Amazing. Thanks so much, Elaine, for having me. It was a pleasure to have a conversation.

As always, we will be sure to have informational links posted in our show notes. Make sure you check them out to learn more. And thank you once again for joining us.

Bio from the Thanks for joining us for Bio from the Bayou, and we hope you'll join us again.

To never miss the latest updates in biotech, hit the subscribe button now.

We'll catch you on our next episode of Bio from the Bayou.

This podcast was edited by Resonate Recordings.