CommenT
Trust in Science: a novel research
1
GlaxoSmithKline, Stevenage,
UK.
2
GlaxoSmithKline, Buenos
Aires, Argentina.
3
GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville,
PA, USA.
✉e-​mail: isrogloger@
hotmail.com
https://doi.org/10.1038/
d41573-021-00065-​z
NAture Reviews | Drug Discovery
partnership model in Latin America
Israel S. Gloger1 ✉, Rosana Felice2 and Kevin P. Madauss3
Ten years ago, GlaxoSmithKline established an innovative model for public–private research
partnerships in Latin America known as Trust in Science. Here, we summarize this novel initiative,
illustrate its achievements in terms of scientific advances and local talent development,
and highlight the key learnings that could be applied to similar initiatives.
Public–private partnerships have typically been consid-
ered as a means of enabling research to be more respon-
sive to changing social and global challenges, thereby
accelerating innovation and allowing wider economic
and social gains from joint investments between gov-
ernments and the private sector. The main benefit of
such schemes is that they facilitate the matching of the
specialist scientific expertise of academics with the capa-
bilities of industry scientists to translate scientific break-
throughs into therapeutic advances, all in the context of
secure funding1. The main challenges of such approaches
include the perception of academics that research in
industry is driven by market forces rather than being
led by the science, and concerns over ownership of
intellectual property rights1.
Mindful of these challenges, and motivated by the
goal to support the underappreciated translational poten-
tial of academic biomedical research in Latin America,
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) established an innovative model
for public–private partnerships in the region: the Trust
in Science initiative. This initiative initially focused on
Argentina and Brazil, but has expanded recently to include
collaborations in Uruguay and Mexico. It is differenti-
ated by its focus on peer-​to-​peer scientific collaboration
between academic and industry scientists, its approach
to intellectual property rights for the academic part-
ners, and its transparent process for project applications
and co-​funding decisions with governments.
Approach of the GSK Trust in Science initiative
Following its creation in 2011, the initiative initially
signed long-​term co-​funding agreements with the key
government funding agencies in Argentina (Consejo
Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
(CONICET)) and in the state of Sao Paulo in Brazil
(Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São
Paulo (FAPESP)). Further identical agreements have
also subsequently been signed with government bodies
in Mexico (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
(CONACYT)) and Uruguay (Agencia Nacional de
Investigación e Innovación (ANII)). This is the first time
0123456789();:
such a comprehensive programme has been undertaken
in partnership with governments in Latin America.
The initiative has committed to a transparent and
robust application, evaluation and selection process.
Specific areas of therapeutic research were identified in
advance, providing clarity and focus to the applicants.
After this, three independent scientific committees
evaluated the scientific proposals: a committee of inde-
pendent experts from Brazil and Argentina; a scientific
review panel of GSK therapeutic area experts; and a set
of independent referees nominated confidentially by the
state funding agencies.
As well as financial support for the individual research
projects, more broadly the initiative has sought to facili-
tate peer-​to-​peer scientific collaboration. To do this, it has
focused on establishing a model of close collaboration
between academic and industry scientists, with regular
meetings to share data and ideas, ensuring that the ben-
efits of the initiative extend beyond funding to include
mentorship, project advice and direction, and support for
development of local scientific talent. This collaboration
has provided scientists with the invaluable experience of
learning how their research ideas might be translated into
therapeutics with commercial potential. Furthermore,
the value of these collaborations is evidenced by the fact
that they have continued well past the funding period.
To mitigate scepticism related to onward retention of
intellectual property rights by the academic teams, the ini-
tiative set out a clear intellectual property policy based on
the Lambert model (see Related links), recognizing that
any invention or intellectual property created by the aca-
demic partners as part of their GSK-​funded project belongs
entirely to them and their institution. GSK reserved a
‘first refusal option’ for licensing the research assets,
with the academic institutions being free to negotiate with
other parties if no interest was expressed by GSK.
Key outcomes of the Trust in Science initiative
Overall, the committees evaluated 330 proposals, with
funding allocated to ~60 research projects across
Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Mexico. Projects have
volume 20 | August 2021 | 571
Comment
covered several therapeutic areas of relevance to these
countries, and aligned with the research expertise
of GSK, including: tropical and neglected diseases,
viral diseases (HIV); tuberculosis; metabolic diseases
(diabetes and obesity); respiratory diseases (espe-
cially asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary dis-
ease); and vaccine development. More recently, the
programme has focused on proposals in immuno-​
oncology and immune-​inflammation-​related diseases
(see Related links).
The scientific value of these research collabora-
tions is evidenced by the outputs: more than 90 publi-
cations in peer-​reviewed journals, 7 granted patents,
many presentations at international conferences, and an
oncology-​focused scientific symposium (see Supplem­
entary Fig. 1). Notable published findings from research
funded through the initiative (Supplementary Table 1)
include the discovery of a strong synthetic lethal inter-
action between PLK1 and BRCA1, with implications for
PLK1 inhibitors currently in late-​stage clinical trials2;
and the finding that immunization with a chimeric
protein (BLS-​MICA) induces therapeutic anti-​MICA
polyclonal antibodies and subsequent anti-​tumour
immune response reprogramming, opening the possi-
bility of a novel anti-​tumour vaccine for use in patients
with MICA-​expressing tumours3. In some cases, the
collaborations have even led to the creation of private
companies to commercialize research assets.
Importantly, ~50 students have completed postgrad-
uate degrees as part of the research projects funded,
and career development for scientific talent in Latin
America has been consistently supported. During
2013–2015, along with numerous other large organiza-
tions, GSK participated in the ‘Science without Borders’
programme established by the government of Brazil.
Under the scheme, 13 pre- and post-​doctoral students
spent up to 1.5 years working at European or US GSK
research sites. GSK has also hosted 4 post-​doctoral
fellows in collaboration with CONACYT, all of whom
have continued their scientific career, 2 of them in
industry. And finally, in 2018, a fellowship scheme
was established between GSK, the Ministry of Science
in Argentina and the Crick Institute in London, and
as part of this scheme the Crick Institute is hosting a
post-​doctoral fellow from Argentina.
Summary and perspectives
The Trust in Science initiative was designed as an
innovative way to boost research in therapeutic areas
of interest for GSK as well as to invest in the develop-
ment of the research and development community of
Latin America, tapping into academic experience and
enabling academia to harness more of its potential in
a commercial setting. Over the past decade, the initi-
ative has created a unique set of interactions both at
the level of funding, by working directly with individ-
ual government state funding agencies, and through
the development of long-​term scientific collaborations
with key academic institutions. This model created an
environment of trust and scientific excellence shared
572 | August 2021 | volume 20 www.nature.com/nrd
0123456789();:
by all parties, and other pharmaceutical companies and
biotechnology institutions with the same philosophy
and objective are encouraged to use this as a template.
The type of collaborative approach exemplified by the
Trust in Science initiative may be particularly valuable
in light of recent trends in drug discovery and develop-
ment; for example, the need for specialist skills in areas
such as genomics, artificial intelligence or in silico trials.
Finally, such approaches could be vital as budgets
for investment in scientific research remain constrained
in a post-​pandemic environment. Until the turn of the
millennium, Latin American governments had not tra-
ditionally prioritized investment in scientific research
and development on a comparable scale to similar-​sized
economies elsewhere. There was then a period of sus-
tained investment by many governments in the region,
with significant increases in budget allocations for state
research agencies, the establishment of new Ministries
for Science, and funding to support study and train-
ing programmes overseas4,5. This investment drove an
increase in the volume of scientific output, encouraged
scientists who were based overseas to return to their
home countries to lead research initiatives and demon-
strated the value of a shift towards a knowledge-​based
economy4,5. However, with recent political instability
and economic uncertainty in the wake of the COVID-19
pandemic, scientists fear that the region’s hard-​won gains
in scientific investment and expertise are threatened by
the looming economic crisis, funding cuts and suspen-
sion of international scholarship programmes. In such
an environment, the potential to bridge gaps through
active collaboration with industry in public–private ini-
tiatives such as Trust in Science may have a crucial role
in supporting mutually beneficial gains in terms of intel-
lectual property, economic development and the foster-
ing of long-​lasting scientific collaboration, perhaps the
most important benefit of all.
1. Palmer, M. & Chaguturu, R. Academia–pharma partnerships for
novel drug discovery: essential or nice to have? Expert Opin. Drug
Discov. 12, 537–540 (2017).
2. Carbajosa, S. et al. Polo-​like kinase 1 inhibition as a therapeutic
approach to selectively target BRCA1-deficient cancer cells by
synthetic lethality induction. Clin. Cancer Res. 25, 4049–4062
(2019).
3. Torres, N. et al. Restoration of antitumor immunity through
anti-MICA antibodies elicited with a chimeric protein. J. Immunother.
Cancer 8, e000233 (2020).
4. Van Noorden, R. The impact gap: South America by the numbers.
Nature 510, 202–203 (2014).
5. Catanzaro, M. et al. South American science: big players. Nature
510, 204–206 (2014).
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge Diego Alvarez Garcia, GSK Argentina, Djalma Oper, GSK
Uruguay and Fishawack Health for support in writing the article.
Competing interests
I.S.G., K.P.M. and R.F. are employees of GSK.
Supplementary information
Supplementary information is available for this paper at https://doi.org/
10.1038/d41573-021-00065-​z.
Related links
Lambert Review of Business-​University Collaboration: Final Report:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1509981
Latin American scientists push frontiers in oncology: https://www.nature.
com/articles/d42473-019-00365-4