Bench to Business

A HIT-identification technology targeting a given biological target or mechanism of action naturally opens multiple strategic paths. And this is often when decisions become the most challenging.

Platform, Single Asset, Early Pipeline… Each option implies a different business model, but also a different way of building the company.
👉 A platform approach often resonates with founders comfortable with exploration, iteration and breadth. It can naturally evolve into a CRO / service-based activity, enabling earlier revenue generation: we have beautiful examples here in Québec.
👉 A single-program strategy is typically more focused, centered on advancing a Lead and building a therapeutic biotech.
From an investor perspective, preferences are far from uniform. They vary with stage, risk appetite and the strategic narrative.

💡 Which path best aligns with your Hit-identification technology, your resources, your founder profile? Which funding milestone should you target?

In early drug discovery, some situations feel ambiguous until you look at them through the medicinal chemistry lens!
An experienced medicinal chemist doesn’t just optimize potency or run SAR cycles, we understand the biological environment the molecule must navigate from the moment it enters the body to the moment it reaches its target.

👉 Drug–Target Interaction: 3D binding pose and selectivity across isoforms
👉 Physiological Barriers: gut absorption, brain penetration, cellular and nuclear membranes, transporter systems
👉 Elimination Pathways: liver oxidative and conjugative metabolism, cellular and plasma metabolic enzymes
👉 Behaviour across Biological Compartments: plasma protein binding, volume of distribution, tissue exposure
👉 Key Toxicity Signals: drug–drug interactions, hERG, genotoxicity, mutagenicity

Apply the medicinal chemistry lens, and complexity resolves into strategy: the science aligns, and the project advances with purpose.

let’s talk about a familiar scene in biotech pitches, the one I like to call “Slide 7.”
That moment when a clear, promising presentation suddenly turns into a flood of in vitro data for too many compounds. And just like that, attention starts to drift.

Sharing results — IC₅₀, selectivity, PK, in vivo efficacy — is essential; that’s what builds scientific credibility. Still, the strongest pitches often stand out by focusing the story:
👉 highlighting the lead compound,
👉 profiling it with clarity,
👉 noting the strength of back-ups analogs within the same chemical series.

A good pitch doesn’t try to show everything — it shows just enough to spark interest.