MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410490267 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2424665122

Framework to identify innovative sources of value creation from platform technologies

2025· review· en· W4410490267 on OpenAlexaff
Charles H. Jones, Marie Beitelshees, Andrew Hill, Matthew Murphy, Ketan Kapadia, Mikael Dolsten, Jane M. True

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsBridgepoint Active Healthcare
FundersPfizer
KeywordsValuation (finance)Value capturePortfolioCompetitive advantageKnowledge managementTransformative learningEmerging technologiesProcess managementBusiness valueComputer scienceBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Data scienceValue creationMarketingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Platform technologies are fundamentally reshaping the pharmaceutical industry, offering unprecedented potential for innovation across multiple therapeutic areas. However, traditional valuation models, focused on single-asset metrics, struggle to capture the full spectrum of value these technologies create. This paper presents a comprehensive framework for evaluating the innovative sources of value creation enabled by platform technologies throughout the drug development lifecycle. Through a systematic literature review, in-depth case studies, and framework development, we provide a structured methodology for capturing the diverse benefits of these technologies. Our findings reveal that platform technologies generate value across strategic, technical, and adaptive dimensions, requiring a multifaceted valuation approach. The proposed Platform Value Identification across Strategic, Technical, and Adaptive domains Framework defines key value drivers, specifies quantitative assessment metrics, and provides implementation guidance to inform strategic decision-making in research and development investment, portfolio management, and business development. Application of the framework to case studies of Alnylam's RNAi platform, Genentech's therapeutic antibody platform, and Moderna's mRNA platform demonstrates its broad utility and impact potential. By adopting this holistic, data-driven approach, stakeholders can better assess the long-term value and competitive advantages of well-implemented platform technologies, accelerating the development of transformative therapies for patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.174
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207