FST JOURNAL

The Government has outlined ambitious plans to make the UK the leading life science economy in Europe by 2030 and, by 2035, the third most important life science economy globally, after the US and China.

After a warm welcome to the new Arc Refinery lab space for Life Sciences from its Managing Director, Jim Stret- ton, Lord Willetts (FST Chair) captured the excitement and anticipation in the room by stating that “we have really got the right people in the right place, at the right time”. The first speaker was Steve Bates OBE, Executive Chair for the Office of Life Sciences. He began by looking at the 10-Year Health Plan for England, published by the Department of Health, the UK’s Modern Industrial Strategy by the Department of Business, which focuses on business investment in eight growth driving sectors, of which life science is one, and finally the Life Sciences Sector Plan.

The plan’s ambition is that the UK will be the leading Life Science economy in Europe by 2030 and, by 2035, the third most important life science economy globally, after the US and China. The UK is trying to ensure that all of these ambitions will be underpinned by investment targets for commercial research and development (R&D), particularly access to scale up capital, and access for patients to new therapies, for example. Across each of the 33 actions, there is a granular set of details which are really important. Mr Bates described them as the floor, not the ceiling, for what the UK needs to do within the public sector. These are enabling world class R&D, making the UK an out- standing place in which to start, grow, scale and invest, and driving health innovation and NHS reform.

In the manufacturing sector, it can be hard to compete globally with other countries that have more resources to support investment decisions. However, this has changed in recent times with support from the Government, giving us a more competitive footing and enabling attraction of investment. The world is moving fast in this area, alongside science. Mr Bates said he was grateful to Lawrence Tallon, Chief Executive at medicines regulator MHRA, for leadership that is thinking about both the AI-enabled world and how fundamental science is changing.

He noted that it is hard to sell to the NHS, which has so many different parts. However, through what is being called a “rules-based pathway”, teams are putting together the best of the British public sector and the best of the private sector. He said that the UK is small enough to be “exquisitely networked”, and large enough to be globally impactful, making our private-public partnerships workable and giving us a competitive advantage.

The Office for Life Sciences now sits across three departments – the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, the Department of Health and Social Care, and the Department for Business and Trade.

Some examples of progress that the Office has made recently include a biotech agreement deal, cancer vaccines, exciting work around genomic processes, and the Obesity Pathway Innovation Programme. Mr Bates spoke about the grand opening of the Moderna Innova- tion and Technology Centre in Oxfordshire – now able to produce 250 million vaccine doses a year. The UK remains committed to pioneering science and technology and he noted that the UK did well in a period where stem cell research became more difficult in competitor nations. He concluded that staying true to the course of science during periods where others may be vacillating is a competitive advantage.

The second speaker was Tony Wood, Chief Scien­ tific Officer at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), who has worked within the life sciences industry for more than 30 years. He explored the Life Sciences Strategy Plan through the lens of his current role at GSK. Having worked both in the UK and the US in Cambridge, Massachusetts, he has watched the UK’s approach to drug discovery and development, mature and change, and said that we are at a pivotal point.

In his early career, he was involved in the discovery of an HIV drug in the 1990s that took the disease from a death sentence to a chronic, livable condition. People living with HIV now take one tablet a day, or, increasingly, get a long-acting injection that protects them from the progression of their disease.

Vaccines have had the single biggest impact on world health after clean water, and for many reasons, people are living much longer than they have in the past. Largely speaking, we are only just starting to see those curves begin to dip. There are now more 60-year-olds than there are five-year-olds in the UK, for example. However, one issue is that a longer life does not always equate to a healthier one. In addition, once you have had a single disease, your chances of a second one increase. Although we think about disease as a singular proposition, multi-morbidity is the greater problem.

Every year, chronic diseases are responsible for something like 43 million deaths worldwide. One example is fibrosis – excess fibrous connective tissue that can lead to organ failure. Nearly 45% of all deaths have some pathobiological component of fibrosis associated with them.

The number of people living with dementia is expected to reach 78 million by 2030, and cases of cancer are continuing to rise and are becoming more prevalent in younger populations. All of this has a big impact on patients and their families and comes with substantial economic cost.

Preventable conditions

For example, the members of the G20 lose around a trillion dollars of productivity each year from preventable conditions in people aged 50 to 64. Mr Wood cited Andrew Scott’s book The Longevity Imperative, which agues that we need a radical rethink of healthy ageing across economic, social, health and scientific fronts. For example, when we are ill in our 80s, living to our 90s has limited appeal, but when we are healthy, we look forward to future stages in life.

The decisions that we take in our 30s influence the health of our 50-year-old selves, so preemption or prevention is an important component of the R&D under- taken at GSK. There is a growing field associated with the science of ageing and the exploration of biological pathways to allow earlier intervention and the connection of those pathways to allow earlier intervention and the connec- tion of those pathways to conditions which were a result of a prior injury or illness. A bridge can then be made between preventative actions and a framework of treatment that we currently understand in the context of regulation. The aim is to better understand age-related diseases and develop new treatments and prevention strategies.

Mr Wood said that when he started in the industry as a medicinal chemist, you could only approximate whether you understood a disease and it was rare to design a medicine that was successful. However, we are now in a position where we can measure disease before we try to start to intervene and design molecules for that purpose. He explained that that allows medical chemists to provide transformative opportunities for preemption. GSK are investing significantly in collaborations to build that understanding. He provided some examples including Steatotic Liver Disease (SLD), and the metabolic component of it – called “mash”. It affects 12 million people globally, but through the work that GSK has done with the UK Biobank and other partners, it is increasingly getting to a point where his team can draw a straight line between a molecular target in mash, validated by human genetics through individual points, all the way through the intervening layers of biology, in which every single layer (if it is successful) increases the probability of success of the next one. He explained that this can all be done without reaching for a single pipette or laboratory to design a molecule. Once this has been done for a particular disease such as SLD, Mr Wood explained that he receives a complete list of molecules, rather than just one which ultimately improves analysis and furthers potential treatment of other diseases.

He concluded that if the audience accepted his thesis that we are now in a world where we can measure disease before we choose to intervene, that puts the patient firmly at the centre of everything, right from the beginning through to the end. He said that collaboration is key and the UK has a unique opportunity, through translational research networks to be a leading force as technologies change.

The third speaker of the evening’s panel was Baroness Nicola Blackwood, Chair of Genomics England, who gave a policy perspective. She spoke about Genomics England as a case study on how to invest in life sciences assets, and how long-term political commitment and investment policy alignment can drive better care in the NHS, through public, private partnerships done well. She explained that Genomics England’s vision is a world where everyone benefits from Genomic Healthcare. 

Since its launch in 2020, GE has helped over 100,000 patients, and scaling. On the right side of the image, readers can see research – both from academics and industry partners, interrogating the data in GE’s secure research environment. Genomics England sits in the centre. She explained that they operate the sequencing pipeline, manage the data infrastructure, and translate research back into clinical practice. The power of this model is that the two loops self-reinforce the diagnostic discoveries made in the research environment. They flow back into the clinic and consented clinical data replenishes our data set for further discovery. 

Baroness Blackwood said that getting to the current stage has not been straight forward as UK infrastructure had never previously embedded genomics into routine health care. Her teams had to redesign clinical pathways, train 1000s of clinicians and make genomics more mainstream aware, whilst building public trust. This was at a time when concerns about data were very high. She explained that it required years of very close partnership with the NHS and a determination to not just prove that the science worked, but to build a system that could adopt it. The payoff she said is that it is now a virtuous cycle that generates three forms of return: 

• For participants, with better diagnostics and better therapeutics
• For the NHS, with better productivity and efficiency through stratification, screening and early intervention
• For the UK, through increased R and D investment and clinical innovation. 

It is important to remember that none of this works without public trust. At the heart of the GE model is the participant panel - patients and families who directly advise the board that safeguard consent. She explained that they ensure data is always used responsibly and for the public good. The trust that they have helped build ensures that 95% of patients (who are asked) say yes to using their data for research. This is critical for the data set to be used nationally. However, genomic data alone is not enough. It only becomes powerful when it is linked to other information, clinical records, pathology, radiology and transcriptomics. Therefore, said Baroness Blackwood, they invest heavily in quality and linkage with other national data initiatives like the Cancer Registry, the National Pathology Imaging Collaborative. The GE research environment now hosts over 700 active projects and more than 1500 accredited researchers, who all work with that data. 

Baroness Blackwood then pointed to the work of Dr Jack Bartram, a consultant hematologist at Great Ormond Street Hospital. He explored what happened when he introduced whole genome sequencing into his routine practice, with striking results. In 81% of cases, whole genome sequencing provided additional information for diagnosis. In 24% of cases, it changed management of the condition and in 14% of cases it reclassified diagnosis entirely. She explained that genomics is not always about condition management. Sometimes it does not just guide care, it can change it. It can spare children from having treatment that they never needed in the first place. 

For example, ‘Baby Oliver’ was born with a six-centimetre tumour on his leg. Under the microscope, it looked like a very aggressive cancer and the molecular tests were inconclusive. It therefore required whole genome sequencing to tell the full story. They found that it was not cancer at all. It was a benign myofibroma and because of that single test, baby Oliver (a newborn), was spared chemotherapy and surgery - a major win at that age. Another example about how national scale genomics drove the discovery of a new syndrome is ‘Charlie’who by the time he was 12 had been through years of investigations, a long diagnostic odyssey trying to understand his severe learning disability. All of the standard tests got him and his family no closer to understanding what was going on. It was only when his genome was analysed critically within the National Genome Research Library, alongside thousands of others that the pattern began to emerge, said Baroness Blackwood. Children with the same variant of RNU4-2, which is a tiny noncoding gene, were found to share the same developmental features. Although no therapies yet exist, now that the genetic cause is known, discovery and research can begin. Crucially, his family and the thousands like him have hope that they will find an answer.

Baroness Blackwood explained that by linking whole genomes with pathology, radiology and clinical records, they are creating a rich data set. Combining that with multi model data and AI, the results are becoming very powerful. She said that researchers are already starting to detect cancer subtypes that were invisible before and predicting which tumours will behave aggressively. In another project, GE has developed an AI approach to scan across whole genomes to pick up hidden indel mutations which standard sequencing panels often miss. These are the kinds of mutations that can change treatment decisions and outcomes for patients, so they are meaningful in the clinic as well as in research. 

Baroness Blackwood went on to explain that we only stay competitive if we keep pushing forward the frontiers of Genomic Health Care. This is what ‘the generation study’ is all about. It is the world's first pilot of whole genome sequencing, genomic screening at birth through the National Health System. So far, over 25,000 babies have been recruited across more than 50 hospitals. GE are testing for 200 rare but treatable conditions at birth, giving children the best start in life, and abolishing that diagnostic odyssey that Charlie (mentioned previously) experienced. This means re-engineering newborn screening workflows, training midwives and earning the trust of new parents at one of the most vulnerable moments in their lives. She said that that is the kind of work that we need to put in place if we are serious about shifting genomics from reactive and research environments into predictive public health. 

Concluding, she explained that genomics is now one of the big bets in the NHS 10 year plan and the life sciences strategy. It is central to the government's vision for a transformed health system. We are in the foothills of this journey. We need sustained political commitment to build on the assets and the investment we already have. We need policy alignment across research, healthcare and industry partners, and we need to define key public private partnerships to realise that vision. She said that it is clear we can get ahead when we drive these missions and identify what we are good at. Let us make sure that we do not lose the advantage in the next decade.

The final speaker was Professor Sir John Bell FRS, Emeritus Regius Professor of Medicine of University of Oxford who started advising on Life Sciences when Paul Drayson created the original Office of Life Sciences. He began by saying that the wider life sciences community has really grown in the past 20 years and under Theresa May's government, there was a discussion around an industrial strategy, with life sciences being chosen as a key focus. He noted that the UK had three sector deals which was miles ahead of other countries. Citing an observation made by Alan Langland (former CEO of NHS England), he said that this was because we act as a group, we hunt as a pack, and we try and work together wherever we can. That includes various components including academic research programmes and the universities which are crucial to the strategy. 

Professor Bell said that the NHS, despite all challenges, is still crucial to our success as a life sciences hub. Government funders and charities also contribute to what we are trying to do. He explained that there is now a growing network of small companies alongside large, global companies in the UK which knit it all together so that we can deliver the things that we have been asked to do by government and make a difference. We have seen the growth of small companies into mid-sized companies and have had an enormous amount of success around our big programmes. Things are not perfect, explained Professor Bell, but he urged UK policy makers to ‘lean into what we are good at’. Mentioning China, he said that their biotech sector was thriving and that the UK should try to work in synergy with them, otherwise risking coming ‘head to head’ with them.  

His second point was about delivering health care to the population. Although he commends the NHS, he said that it is in trouble due to what he described as large amounts of money going into a failing system. He argued that a healthcare system designed in the 1950s which has extended life expectancy by 15.7 years since it was invented, is the biggest achievement of any human endeavour in the last 100 years. Many of those successes have come from the UK. However, he thinks we have a healthcare system that is not working. Professor Bell said that we need to take stock of some of the options described by previous speakers such as early intervention and use these ideas to help solve how we deliver health care more effectively. Where we can live better lives, we also become more successful economically, he said. Life Sciences is a place where we can do that with the discoveries we make. However, the absence of an effective healthcare system that deals with the problem of comorbidity and chronic disease adds to a drag on the economy due to a very large number of people out of the economic workforce due to long-term illness. According to a November 2025 ‘Keep Britain Working’ report, we spend £85 billion a year propping up very significant numbers of people (in the millions), off work because of sickness. Professor Bell said that many of those illnesses are treatable and manageable.

Exploring some examples of where the UK has been leading on Life Science work, he cited the UK Biobank. As some working in the early stages of it, he said that it was turned down by several MRC (Medical research Council) committees before being taken on. With 2.5 million people recruited, there is also an opportunity to blend this with the Prevention Agenda. He said that we are in a good position to take advantage of data and get it to a good place. We need to think about how we blend that data story with clinical trials here. The truth is, we know how to do it, but we just need to line ourselves up. Citing some past successes, he said that there are real opportunities, particularly in the cancer space, to think a little bit harder about how early diagnostics will actually help us get to a better place.

Watch the full event, including the Q&A that followed here.