Though the very basis of the biotech industry, university technology transfer in medical devices has largely been ignored. The difficulty behind device tech transfer: innovation occurs differently in devices than in biotech. New device designs are frequently the result of sudden realizations by physicians, rather than extensive clinical discovery. Stanford University and Germany's Steinbeis Center are implementing different approaches, evolving out of their respective environments, but aimed at achieving the same goal: promoting device technology transfer.
by Stephen Levin
For university technology transfer in medical products, this truly is both the best and worst of times. For biopharmaceuticals, tech transfer is common currency, widely sought and accepted; but in medical devices, tech transfer is all but unheard of. That's because the method by which most device innovation occurs differs markedly from the way most biotechnology advances come about
Communication with patients has become a particularly crucial factor for investors, payers, and other healthcare decision-makers in a hostile market environment.
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest remains one of the most challenging and resource-intensive emergencies in cardiovascular care. At SCAI 2025, clinicians presented a novel algorithm that improved triage decisions and reduced unnecessary interventions.
A battle may be forming over the 2027 FDA user fee reauthorizations. At a conference Friday, Democratic Rep. Jake Auchincloss supports them for their effectiveness, while Deputy FDA Commissioner Grace Graham echoed criticisms from HHS Sec. Kennedy, among others, in calling for reform to ensure public trust.
