Last year’s ISCT saw the launch of several new platforms amidst quite a bit of fanfare. There were launches from Cytiva (Sefia), Ori Biotech (IRO), Xcell Biosciences (AVATAR), and several others. This year saw a more muted event as the field goes through growing pains transitioning from being driven by novel, earl-stage programs to now matur(ing) commercial assets. We asked attendees this year for their key takeaways, highlights, and view of how ISCT in 2025 contrasts with 2024. See what was top of mind for these executives and investors across the cell therapy space.
A key theme running through the conference was the persistent challenge of manufacturability in cell and gene therapies, with a strong focus on reducing manufacturing time and improving process predictability. TIL therapies were spotlighted, with clinicians expressing concerns over the high cost per treatment and the logistical hurdles of scaling due to long, variable manufacturing timelines. In response to these challenges, discussions around decentralized and regionalized manufacturing models gained traction. Meanwhile, new data from BlueWhaleBio, showcased promising progress in T-cell activation and rapid Day 0 transduction, underlining the field’s push toward faster, more efficient production. Complementing these discussions, scientific sessions explored innovative biological tools like organoid models as alternatives to traditional animal testing, reflecting a broader ambition to make cell and gene therapy development more predictive and globally translatable.
I saw for the first time at this year’s ISCT (and ARM’s Meeting on the Med immediately before): the industry talking about commercial viability as the key hurdle holding back the cell and gene therapy field. There finally seems to be consensus that these treatments no longer have a safety or efficacy problem, but rather, an economic problem. Addressing cost of goods (COGs), manufacturability and scalability pre-clinical (in process development at the latest) was the answer I heard most often. This includes putting a target COGS, target throughput, and target line of coverage in your target product profile (TPP) to avoid further investment in therapeutics that are not commercially viable. I expect this discussion to amplify throughout the year.
The optimism that characterized last year's conference seemed tempered this year by multiple industry headwinds. Early-stage funding cuts are hampering innovation before it even leaves the bench, while biotech financing increasingly concentrates in megadeals rather than supporting broad innovation. Large pharma companies have also raised partnership thresholds, creating additional barriers for emerging technologies. Despite this, entrepreneurs and innovators continue to drive progress. While automation was at the forefront last year, this year emphasized decentralized and point-of-care models that could transform patient access. Particularly promising is the advancement of rapid manufacturing protocols for CAR-T cells, with several groups showcasing processes that reduce vein-to-vein time from weeks to days. There was also substantive dialogue around how non-viral delivery methods and innovative starting materials might streamline manufacturing while enhancing product consistency.
Check out our key themes of ISCT from 2024 here: https://www.decibio.com/insights/key-themes-across-cell-therapy-from-isct-2024
Comments and opinions expressed by interviewees are their own and do not represent or reflect the opinions, policies, or positions of DeciBio Consulting or have its endorsement. Note: DeciBio Consulting, its employees or owners, or our guests may hold assets discussed in this article/episode. This article/blog/episode does not provide investment advice, and is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. You should do your own research and make your own independent decisions when considering any financial transactions.
.png)
.png)
.png)
