SAN FRANCISCO — It took only a single, one-hour meeting in a Starbucks to convince venture capitalist Robert Nelsen that he was going to invest in the company being built by machine-learning whiz Daphne Koller. “She’s just an amazing force of nature,” said Nelsen, who invests for ARCH Venture Partners.
Koller’s company, Insitro, in a matter of months raised over $100 million from big-name investors including ARCH, Foresite Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, and the firm that manages Jeff Bezos’ personal VC investments. (Koller refers to Bezos by his first name.) Now, it’s time for the next step. On Tuesday, the giant drug maker Gilead Sciences said it would pay Insitro $15 million — and up to $1 billion more down the line if it meets certain goals — for help in developing drugs to treat a common liver disease. It is the South San Francisco-based company’s first deal with a drug maker, and offers a test of whether artificial intelligence can remake drug development.
Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!
GET STARTEDWhat is it?
STAT Plus is a premium subscription that delivers daily market-moving biopharma coverage and in-depth science reporting from a team with decades of industry experience.
What's included?
- Authoritative biopharma coverage and analysis, interviews with industry pioneers, policy analysis, and first looks at cutting edge laboratories and early stage research
- Subscriber-only networking events and panel discussions across the country
- Monthly subscriber-only live chats with our reporters and experts in the field
- Discounted tickets to industry events and early-bird access to industry reports
About the Authors
I’m not sure how much of a “first” this is. Janssen made high-dimensional gene-expression data from 230,000 of their compounds using Genometry’s L1000 technology way back in 2016, specifically for machine-learning-in-drug-discovery applications. Works well.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20151007006618/en#.VhZdNWTBzRZ
http://genometry.com/
Do I believe in 50-100 years problems in biology and medicine will be solved in silico? yes
Do I believe all the buzz around AI, machine learning is because we are at a stage where it can actually do that? Not at all
Culprit, she has been working on it for 20 years, and I doubt she has achieved anything meaningful in that area, or there is no evidence of it
There is simply not enough knowledge, consistent experimental data, and I guess, good enough algorithms to pull it off
Here are her Google Scholar citations. You’re free to define “meaningful” as you wish.
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=5Iqe53IAAAAJ&hl=en
meaningful = something that has a real world general applicability, beside an academic proof of concept limited to a narrow specific case. As typical for bioinformatic research
Lot of hyperbole in here, unsurprisingly.