New drug competitiveness, patient-focused structure is the key

KDDF investment committee member proposes capital- and patient-centric development in Phase 3 clinical trials

Discussion on refining investment review criteria balancing innovation· success probability

For future projects, redesigning support systems to increase clinical success rates in subsequent projects

As the Korea Drug Development Fund (KDDF) enters its second phase, opinions have emerged that a structural shift, prioritizing higher success rates over simple pipeline expansion, is necessary for future tasks.

During the investment review process, voices called for evaluating project quality based on patient population definition, clinical positioning, and biomarker strategies, rather than viewing innovation and commercialization potential as a completely distinguished one.

On the 8th, the KDDF held the '2026 Investment Review Committee Workshop' and conducted a panel discussion under the title 'Investment Review that Produces Results: Directions and Choices for National Drug Development Projects."

The Korea Drug Development Fund (KDDF) held the '2026 Investment Review Committee Workshop' on the 8th.

The panel discussion was moderated by Koh Dae-kyung, Senior Manager at KDDF, with participation from: ▲Professor Sung Hoon Kim of Yonsei University ▲Junghee Lim, Vice President of InterVest ▲Professor Jaeho Cheong of Yonsei Cancer Hospital ▲Taegon Baik, CEO of Arum Therapeutics.

Korean drug development, highlighting challenges in clinical trials and capital beyond pipeline count

The discussion began with an evaluation of Korea's competitiveness in drug development. Despite a rapid increase in domestic pipelines, participants discussed why global drug outcomes remain limited and identified the gap between R&D capabilities and actual performance.

Panelists agreed that while the quantitative growth of the domestic ecosystem is evident, it must be supplemented by Phase 3 capital, commercialization judgment, and patient-centric development strategies to translate into global success.

First, Professor Sung Hoon Kim noted that the domestic ecosystem has grown to an incomparable scale, but cautioned that quantitative expansion does not automatically yield global results. 

Professor Kim said, "With thousands of pipelines in motion, even if most fail statistically, I believe a global drug will emerge soon," and assessed, "However, for this to be structurally possible, we ultimately need funds capable of supporting Phase 3 trials."

InterVest Vice President Junghee Lim noted that the increase in pipelines should be viewed alongside its underlying structure. Lim explained that many projects are likely in early clinical stages, often linked to the rise of university-based venture startups. 

While acknowledging the advantage of having the most knowledgeable technical experts lead development, Lim questioned whether rigorous eligibility judgments from a commercialization perspective were adequately applied.

(from left Koh Dae-kyung, Senior Manager at KDDF, Professor Jaeho Cheong of Yonsei Cancer Hospital , Professor Sung Hoon Kim of Yonsei University 

From a clinical perspective, 'patient-centric' was presented as a key keyword. Professor Jaeho Cheong suggested that, since the endpoint of drug development is the patient, the approach should shift away from a 'substance-centric' focus toward defining which patient groups, which biomarkers, and which clinical benefits will be achieved. 

Professor Cheong stated, "We are playing a game of probability regarding patient reachability," and added, "We must move toward a patient-centric, not substance-centric, approach."

Professor Cheong added that competitiveness should be viewed based on clinical benefit rather than the number of candidates. This means that a focus on which patient segments to target and what clinical positioning to take must come first to increase the value of thousands of drugs.

Role of investment review…balancing innovation and failure Probability

Following the evaluation of competitiveness, the discussion moved to the roles of the Fund and the Investment Review Committee. Senior Manager Koh Dae-kyung asked which criteria (among global competitiveness, innovation, performance potential, or commercialization potential) should be the primary focus.

The discussion focused on the balance between 'selecting projects with high success probability' and 'early screening of projects with high failure probability.' As a project funded by public capital, it cannot focus solely on short-term results, yet it is also inappropriate to delay the verification of development feasibility in the name of innovation.

Professor Chung proposed 'Translational Probability,' the likelihood of reaching the patient, as the core criterion for investment review. He explained that the role of public support is not just picking winners but also screening out projects with high failure probability early on.

​"The endpoint of the risky journey of drug development is reaching the patient," Professor Chung explained. "Creating criteria that can quantify, index, and objectify this will be the role of the next generation of the Investment Review Committee." 

However, considering that the KDDF is at a stage where it must produce results in its remaining period, he acknowledged that the weight of competitiveness and commercialization potential might increase.

(from left) Junghee Lim, Vice President of InterVest, Taegon Baik, CEO of Arum Therapeutics

From an investor's perspective, competitiveness and success probability were emphasized more heavily. Vice President Lim explained that the committee is composed of experts from various fields to view a single project from multiple perspectives. 

Lim stated that if a 'Best-in-class' drug is targeted, the proposal must include head-to-head comparisons with competitors, a mechanism of action (MoA) demonstrating competitiveness, evidence-based experimental models, and clinical trial designs.

Regarding novel targets, Lim also distinguished between research and development. While a novel target may be a research topic to explore over a long period for academia, a company must produce results within limited resources and time.

Future Projects, re-designing support systems to increase clinical success rates

In the latter half of the discussion, participants deliberated on the direction of support after the current national drug development project and the structure of subsequent projects.

Panelists argued that future projects should be designed to increase the clinical success rate, moving beyond simple research funding. Key tasks identified included investment linkage, clinical site matching, platform technology support, and strategies for securing Human Proof of Concept (PoC).

Regarding this, CEO Taegon Baik suggested different support methods for discovery and clinical stages. Since the discovery stage is high-risk, it should be linked to corporate strategic investment and joint research. At the same time, national budgets should be more concentrated on clinical programs with high success potential.

Professor Kim also proposed a separate track for platform technology support. Unlike individual pipelines, platform technologies have independent value but can appear ambiguous from a private investment perspective, necessitating a dedicated track for public support.

Park Yeong min, Director of the Korea Drug Development Fund

During the Q&A session, issues such as securing financial resources for subsequent projects, operating expert advisory groups, public-led risk-sharing systems, and the need for a legal foundation were raised. Attendees suggested that since government budgets alone have limits, there should be linkages with long-term investment funds like the National Pension Service and expanded participation from private capital.

Park Yeong min, Director of the Korea Drug Development Fund, stated that securing innovation, balancing evaluation and management, recycling budgets from halted projects, and ensuring the continuity of expert organizations are all tasks to be addressed in subsequent projects.

​"We need to consider how to secure innovation and what evaluation criteria to maintain since public funds are involved," Director Park said. "From a VC's perspective, early exits may be important, while from a developer's perspective, there is a need for support until the end to develop a 'First-in-class' drug."

Park added, "There are projects that are discontinued during stage or final evaluations, and we need wisdom on how to reuse those halted budgets. We must prepare in a way that preserves the strengths identified so far while minimizing the weaknesses."