Feedback from the J.P. Morgan Conference

The 44^th Annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference took place from January 12-15, 2026, in San Francisco.

Although we have not been present physically in San Francisco, we have been able to connect into several panel discussions and get access to some presentations. Of course, what is missing is the very rich feedback one gathers from the many informal interactions with people on site.

We provide the feedback we have gathered from the four day’s meeting.

1.      On Monday morning of January 12, 2026, there was a slight disappointment that no mega deal valued at $10 billions + had been announced. Nevertheless, the deal between Lilly and Nvidia has taken almost everybody by surprise. With no major announcement on the last day of the conference, some journalists were wondering if “JPM is evolving away from being the main stage for blockbuster announcements toward something quieter but just as important—a hub for networking, relationship-building and taking the industry’s pulse rather than declaring its future?”

2.      Over the last months, the overall sentiment index of the biotech industry has increased across every metric from current funding climate to future business conditions. The overall rating went from 72 to 90 (100 is neutral) within the last quarter of 2025.

3.      Investors. They are optimistic that 2026 will be better than 2025. It will not be a boom but the end of a long “winter” period. Expectations that several deals of $20 billions + will happen are commonly shared. Many investors foresee as many as 15 IPOs in the first semester, thus allowing increasing new financing capabilities. M&A will also be on the rise, because several large Pharma companies need to replenish their portfolios and that they have “a tremendous power fire” to finance them. Valuation of biotech companies will be raising but not for everyone. Investors clearly indicated two categories of companies: Those who have early validated human data and those who don’t. The partner of one VC company considers that overall, the biotechnology industry is not bold enough, he still sees too many actors working on the same targets and not enough companies taking risks “at moon shots” at the early stage.

4.      The FDA. The turmoil at the agency and the loss of expertise cannot yet be fully assessed and the trauma on the remaining staff is considerable. The removal of most Advisory Committee meetings, where reviewers, experts, sponsors and patient advocacy groups could publicly express their opinions is widely considered as major mistake.  At a Conference parallel event, Richard Pazdur, the former Director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), voiced serious concerns about the diminishing separation between political appointees and drug reviewers at the agency.  He also argued there is not enough transparency and no specific guidelines around a new voucher program that grants accelerated review to certain drugs selected by Trump administration officials. “It’s terrible to see 25 years of work dismantled. I did not leave because I wanted to leave” said Pazdur.

5.      Pricing. The topic has existed for more than 20 years, but it is fair to say that the Trump administration has been more disruptive than expected and that tough negotiations are still ongoing.  Every single CEO has been asked the question and each one stayed rather vague on his own situation. The industry recognises that there is a miss match between increasing prices of drugs for patients while global money available from insurance companies is on a decrease.

6.      China. Everybody agrees that China has become a very strong competitor which is moving at a speed unheard of previously. In a dedicated interview, Frank Jiang VP and Strategy Officer at Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals, has given some hints on how his company has grown from a generic company into a highly innovative one. He mentioned four enablers to explain the success:

a.      The Chinese macroeconomic environment where top-down incentives were given for many years with a “hockey stick” acceleration in 2015, when enormous government subsidies were allocated to innovation in biotechnology. The Chinese authorities have also installed highly efficient regulatory bodies to speed up approvals whenever relevant.

b.      The scale of patients, including naive ones, does not exist anywhere else.  A very large number of CROs and CDMOs are now able to design and monitor well controlled multi-centric studies.

c.      A fast-growing number of modern hospitals is now operating with highly educated Principal Investigators (PI) everywhere.

d.      A general national shared momentum with a very strong focus on delivery. Every single biotech company knows that it has to perform against Chinese and international competitors in order to survive.

Every single large western pharma company is now scouting for innovative drugs and new modalities discovered in China

7.      Several speakers recognised that new modalities such as cell therapies, in vivo CAR-T cells, conditional activated T cell engagers, radio conjugates, sRNA, and microRNA modulators, are showing efficacy in well-designed clinical settings and that some of them will be transformative for human healthcare.  In one of the sessions, two panelists went as far as saying that they believe that for certain diseasses one could imagine moving from treatment to cure

 Paris January 16, 2026

^{This document has been prepared by Jean-Claude Muller and is provided for information purposes only. The information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable but is not warranted to be accurate or complete. The views presented are those of the author at the time of writing and are subject to change. Jean-Claude Muller has no obligation to update these opinions or the information presented.}