Ledger · 2026-08-29 · Pharmaceuticals / Drug Delivery

Enteric Drug Delivery Vehicles via Phosphoric Acidolysis of Natural Plant Spores

Rejected

This concept did not clear the framework. The reasoning is published in full below.

Why it failed

Assessment

The concept fails low CapEx and velocity criteria due to novel excipient regulatory requirements, clinical trials, and Drug Master File filings exceeding 18 months and $5M. Furthermore, it fails like-for-like evaluation because the 249.9-fold bioavailability claim compares an enteric polymer-coated SEC against an uncoated oral drug baseline rather than a finished commercial enteric-coated formulation.

Claimed advantage

249.9-fold higher relative bioavailability of 5-FU in colon tissues compared to uncoated standard oral delivery

Named comparator: Synthetic PLGA Microspheres / Uncoated Oral Delivery

A rejection is not a claim that the science is wrong. It means the venture case did not survive: the comparator was not what the buyer actually buys, the comparison was not like-for-like, the advantage fell short of a step change, or the capital and time to first revenue were prohibitive.

Assessed 2026-08-29 against seven gates plus the voiding sub-tests. How the method works · Browse all concepts