What the MichBio 2026 Drug Discovery and Development Symposium Revealed About the Future of Therapeutic Innovation
/The MichBio 2026 Drug Discovery and Development Symposium brought together leaders across biotech, pharma, academia, investment, and development services throughout the state of Michigan to discuss where therapeutic innovation is headed next. For TSRL President and CEO Dr. Elke Lipka, the most important takeaway centered around how drug development is becoming more integrated, more strategic, and more dependent on early decision making.
Across sessions on new development models, artificial intelligence (AI), regulation, radiopharmaceuticals, funding, and emerging science, one theme kept surfacing. The organizations best positioned for success will be those that bring the right expertise into the process earlier.
“Drug development can no longer be treated as a series of isolated steps,” said Dr. Lipka. “Commercial strategy, regulatory thinking, toxicology, formulation, and funding strategy all need to be considered much earlier if teams want to move more efficiently and make better decisions.”
Development Strategy Is Moving Earlier in the Process
One of the strongest discussions came during the panel on the evolving state of drug discovery and the need to redefine development models. Panelists discussed how advances in technology, market pressure, regulatory expectations, and funding dynamics are changing how companies approach development. Commercialization strategy and regulatory planning are increasingly being integrated earlier into research and development.
That shift is key, as teams that bring regulatory colleagues into drug development discussions early can often avoid expensive detours later. They can also design programs with a clearer understanding of what will be needed to advance toward the clinic.
The panel also emphasized the importance of flexibility. If funding becomes available for one indication, companies and researchers may need to adjust quickly. If market conditions shift, development plans may need to shift with them. The ability to pivot without losing scientific focus is becoming an important advantage.
“Flexibility is becoming one of the most valuable aspects of drug development,” said Dr. Lipka. “A team may start with one path in mind, but funding, data, and market signals can point somewhere else. The key is knowing when to adapt and when to stay focused.”
Speakers also encouraged companies to speak with strategic partners early and often. Close relationships with CROs, technical experts, and potential commercial partners can help teams pressure test assumptions before major capital is spent.
Early Target Validation and Toxicology Still Matter Most
Even as technology changes, several fundamentals remain essential. For instance, Panelists emphasized the importance of strong early target validation and meaningful toxicology readouts. These data points help determine whether a program should move forward, change direction, or stop.
For early-stage companies, this can be one of the most important areas of discipline. Moving too quickly without enough confidence in the biology or safety profile can create avoidable downstream risk.
For TSRL, this connects directly to the company’s development philosophy (more here). The goal is to help teams generate useful data at the right time so they can make clear go or no go decisions.
“In early development, good decisions are often just as valuable as good data,” said Dr. Lipka. “The data need to answer the right question. That is what helps a team decide what to pursue, what to pause, and where to invest next.”
AI Is Useful, But It Has Limits
AI was a major topic throughout the symposium, but the conversation was notably measured. Speakers discussed areas where AI is already proving useful, particularly as an augmentation tool for repetitive or communication-heavy tasks. Examples included patient enrollment, clinical trial data management, and generating study summaries throughout a clinical trial rather than waiting until the end.
At the same time, the panels made clear that AI has limits, especially in high-risk scientific and regulatory decision making. Several speakers noted that clinical translation remains difficult because many AI systems rely on data sets that vary widely in quality. AI cannot easily distinguish between strong and weak data without expert human oversight.
The regulatory path for AI-enabled approaches is also progressing slowly. Convincing the FDA that new models or systems are reliable remains a challenge, especially when those systems have not yet been fully validated.
“AI can help teams work faster, but it cannot replace scientific judgment,” said Dr. Lipka. “The quality of the data still matters. The quality of the question still matters. Human interpretation remains vital, especially when the decision carries real development or regulatory consequences.”
This was reinforced during the panel on AI and the future of drug discovery, which examined how AI is influencing the path from target identification through preclinical development and into the clinic. The strongest message was one of practical realism. AI may improve parts of the process, but deeper biological interpretation and translational decision making still require experienced scientists.
Funding Requires Preparation and Persistence
Another important discussion focused on funding models for drug discovery and development. Panelists at the MichBio 2026 Drug Discovery and Development Symposium covered several options, including SBIR and STTR awards, Pathway to Cures, friends and family funding, partnering, corporate innovation programs such as Novo Nordisk’s non-dilutive support, and the MTRAC Innovation Hub for Life Sciences at the University of Michigan.
The conversation also addressed common mistakes companies make before grant submission, including these key takeaways:
Intellectual property must be clear.
Teams need to understand their audience, including the disease area and patient population.
Applicants should also use available support from funding agencies, including conversations with program officers and requests for feedback.
Unsuccessful applications were framed as part of the process rather than the end of the road. The advice was to understand why a proposal was not funded, address the gaps, and resubmit with a stronger package.
This message aligns closely with TSRL’s experience. Over the years, the company has used non-dilutive funding to advance therapeutic programs and maintain a disciplined portfolio approach.
Collaboration Is Becoming a Competitive Advantage
Across the symposium, collaboration came through as one of the most important themes.
Small and midsize companies often need access to specialized expertise without building every capability internally. Academic innovators need drug development partners who understand how to move drug discoveries closer to clinical readiness. CROs and strategic partners can help fill those gaps when they are engaged early and treated as true collaborators.
For TSRL, this is central to how the company views its role. The strongest partnerships are built when a development partner helps shape the strategy, not simply execute assigned work.
“Companies do not need another vendor that only waits for instructions,” said Dr. Lipka. “They need partners who can think with them, challenge assumptions, and help identify the next right step.”
That mindset is especially important for small to midsize companies, where resources are limited and each decision can have a major impact on the future of a program.
The Industry Needs More Women at the Table
“We had strong women represented at the symposium, including an outstanding keynote from Dr. Felicia Pagliuca, as well as strong presentations from Dr. Jessica Reed and Dr. Andrea Gonzales, but my observation was that we still need more women in these rooms, on these panels, and at the decision-making table,” said Dr. Lipka. “Several young women commented on it during the event, and that matters. Visibility helps shape what the next generation believes is possible.”
For Dr. Lipka, this observation connects directly to her experience as a woman leading a life sciences company. Scientific progress depends on talent, perspective, and lived experience, and that means the industry benefits when more women are included in strategic, scientific, investor, and advisory conversations.
At TSRL, female leadership has helped shape the company’s culture, decision-making style, and collaborative approach. Dr. Lipka believes the future of drug development will be stronger when more women are invited to lead discussions, contribute to strategy, and influence which scientific ideas receive support.
Dr. Lipka added, “Let’s put more women on stage. Let’s ask more women to advise, mentor, and lead. And, let’s support early-career female scientists before they have to fight for visibility on their own.”
What Comes Next
The MichBio Drug Discovery and Development Symposium made clear that the future of therapeutic innovation will depend on better integration across science, strategy, regulation, funding, and collaboration.
Development teams will need to bring regulatory thinking into the process earlier. AI will continue to support certain parts of research and development, but its value will depend on data quality, human interpretation, and a clear understanding of its limitations. Funding will reward teams that can explain both the scientific opportunity and the path to impact. Strong development partners will need to bring strategic input along with technical execution.
For TSRL, the symposium reinforced the importance of serving as a true development partner to biotech, pharma, academic, and research teams. The strongest programs move forward when the right people are involved early, the data are used to guide decisions, and teams are willing to adapt when the science points in a new direction.
“Strong science is the foundation, but it is not enough on its own,” said Dr. Lipka. “Programs move forward when the science is connected to strategy, when the right people are involved early, and when teams are willing to make decisions based on what the data actually show.”
For questions related to the topics in this article, message our scientific team here.
