Startup opportunities in neurology?

[Neuroviking]

Are there neurologists who have gone on to form/become part of good startups? What roles do they play in those startup’s- clinical (ugh) or more basic neuroscience (yay)? Which fields within neurology are hot from a startup perspective?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ProReduction]

Are there neurologists who have gone on to form/become part of good startups? What roles do they play in those startup’s- clinical (ugh) or more basic neuroscience (yay)? Which fields within neurology are hot from a startup perspective?

Can you be more specific in what you consider a "good startup"? Are you thinking of early-stage drug discovery? Early-stage biotech and medical devices? Health-Tech companies?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I’m not sure if TMS falls more under psych, neuro, or neurosurgery but there are a bunch of small (under 150 million market cap) TMS companies that have gone public lately. I know the tech is being used for Parkinson’s Disease. Though they don’t really seem to be hot or popular tech companies based on recent performance.

$STIM, $BWAY, $GNBH (Neuronetics, Brainsway, Greenbrook TMS)

 

[Thama]

I’m not sure if TMS falls more under psych, neuro, or neurosurgery but there are a bunch of small (under 150 million market cap) TMS companies that have gone public lately. I know the tech is being used for Parkinson’s Disease. Though they don’t really seem to be hot or popular tech companies based on recent performance.

$STIM, $BWAY, $GNBH (Neuronetics, Brainsway, Greenbrook TMS)

All of the legitimate TMS applications currently are in psych. Nobody who even pretends to care about evidence-based medicine is using it for Parkinson's.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

All of the legitimate TMS applications currently are in psych. Nobody who even pretends to care about evidence-based medicine is using it for Parkinson's.

So these are bad companies to invest in?

This is interesting to hear though because it seemed like half the neuroscience/neurobiology faculty (basic scientists for the most part) at the Ivy undergrad I attended mentioned it for Parkinson’s/NDD. I guess that shows the difference between basic scientists and clinicians in terms of what each camp believes is feasible lol

 

[ProReduction]

Can you be more specific in what you consider a "good startup"? Are you thinking of early-stage drug discovery? Early-stage biotech and medical devices? Health-Tech companies?

To the OP, the short answer to your initial question is "No". Start-ups desire two qualities in early-members/founders/advisors: expert technical knowledge or expert business skills. For the expert technical knowledge they go to PhDs. For the business skills they go to MBAs. Medical school and residency does not give Neurologists any expertise on basic neuroscience at the level of a PhD in Neuroscience, neural engineering at the level of a MS or PhD in Neural/Biomedical Engineer, or materials science at the level of a PhD in Mechanical/Electrical Engineering. Medical school is focused on clinical care and seeing patients, not R&D. Medical school is also void of teaching high-level business skills that a MBA would yield, unless one chooses a MD/MBA program. Where clinicians usually play a role is on an advisory board once a product is being developed or already being marketed, usually as a bridge to clients/end-users/patients. The only other role that is common for clinicians is in a "Medical Director" role, where they need regulatory knowledge. You see every Stanford doctor chasing these advisory roles.

You do see physicians found start-ups, but a PhD or MBA is almost always in-hand unless it is a "vanity start-up" that you see Ortho MDs do. Two examples are https://synchron.com/ (Neurologist) and PrecisionNeuroscience (Neurosurgeon). These founders put the work in and both have PhDs from great institutions.

If your interest is in joining a start-up in biotech, then get a solid engineering degree in CS/EE/BME/Math from a good school then do a MS or PhD in engineering or work for a bit and get a MBA. Question is whether you want to be on the business side or the technical side?

 

[Thama]

So these are bad companies to invest in?

This is interesting to hear though because it seemed like half the neuroscience/neurobiology faculty (basic scientists for the most part) at the Ivy undergrad I attended mentioned it for Parkinson’s/NDD. I guess that shows the difference between basic scientists and clinicians in terms of what each camp believes is feasible lol

They may feel it has value to study these diseases, or that they plan to develop future clinical applications. But none with real clinical evidence is here or near on the horizon.

 

[JumpingLumberjacksofMaine]

I did some tech transfer consulting work at one point (prior to residency), but my experience is limited. That said, I'd say that I'd bet neuro isn't overly friendly if you're interested in that kind of entrepreneurship (startups for the clinical market). Most of our therapeutics are drugs--biologics or molecular--and while some clinician input (running clinical trials; assessing the competitive landscape; pricing decisions) may be necessary in the process this is pretty far along in the process and probably at a point where that startup has been acquired by big pharma, who have their own MD's. Device-startups have much more scope for re-engineering around problems based on clinician input. In addition FDA approval is much less expensive and onerous, particularly for external devices and diagnostics, and so more common for startups to take something
to a marketable product.

That said, there are exceptions--diagnostic and/or therapeutic devices within neurology--probably neuro-rehab would be a good bet, definitely neuro-IR, possibly pain. Also, some MD's transition to the business world to the point that their particular residency isn't really important--their business judgement is. Tough to see being able to do this while remaining a halfway decent MD if you plan to still practice though.