Powering the Future of Healthcare in Asia Pacific | Funding, IP Protection | Chapter 3 (incl. 1&2)

PoweringtheFuture
of Healthcare
in Asia Paciﬁc
How technology will change
healthcare delivery

Powering the Future
of Healthcare in Asia Paciﬁc
The HealthTech Report
Chapter
3
Funding
Data driven
Healthcare
Chapter
2
Big Data and Analytics
Benefits
Legal Point of View:
Data-driven Healthcare
5 Ways Big Data is
Changing Healthcare
Genomics
Telemedicine
What Does Following
Investment Funding
Tell Us?
Opportunities in
Asia Pacific
Biosensing Wearables
Mobile Devices Health
mHealth
Assessing Whether New
Technology is Subject to
Regulatory Compliance
Looking Forward
Funding
Intellectual Property
Why have we commissioned
the report?
The Creative
Destruction
of Healthcare
Chapter
1
Moore’s Law
The Innovator’s
Dilemma
The Healthcare
Revolution
Dramatic Changes in
Healthcare: A Tectonic
Shift
Healthcare’s New
Paradigm
What are the Legal
Consequences of the
Healthtech Revolution?
NEXT ISSUE
Chapter
4
Disruption
in Healthcare

Key trends and innovation momentum
drivers in Asia Paciﬁc healthcare
Preface
The delivery of healthcare is poised for a radical change.
The unparalleled ability to collect, mine and analyse health
data, the increasing sophistication of bio-sensors, and the
exponential rise in the use of smart phone devices provides
opportunities for a radical re-think in how to economically
and efficiently provide healthcare solutions for populations
across Asia Pacific. This will affect healthcare systems
providers as well as individuals. Healthcare resources that
have been constructed largely to treat disease will need
to be re-thought, to take advantage of technologies that
monitor to prevent illness and to intervene early.
Countries across the
region in various stages of
development are grappling
with the possibilities of
this healthtech revolution
and the legacy issues of
twentieth-century healthcare
infrastructure for twenty-
first-century healthcare
solutions. In doing so, many
issues are raised about the
use of new technologies in
healthcare that regulators
lag behind in answering. It is
these issues that we seek to
address.
This digital revolution of
medicine will not only
significantly benefit
developed health systems, but will also allow developing
economies to leapfrog over expensive development
stages to establish better, effective health systems. For
Asia Pacific’s developing economies, following the same
evolutionary steps of developed economies is neither
feasible nor required. It will prove too costly, take too
long and lead to falling into the same pitfalls experienced
by developed health systems. Above all, it fails to take
advantage of the technology innovation that is disrupting the
delivery of healthcare.
The provision of modern-day healthcare across Asia Pacific
concerns all stakeholders such as physicians, patients,
hospitals, investors and ministries of health. The region
faces a considerable public health challenge which is
driving healthcare spending growth faster than GDP growth
and will continue to negatively impact productivity. By 2030,
India stands to lose approximately 18 million potentially
productive years of life due to non-communicable disease-
caused deaths.
Asia Pacific healthcare is a paradox of significant unmet
medical needs compounded by an under-invested and
immature health system infrastructure. It has a large
population that mostly pays for its own healthcare and is
experiencing fast-growing power of purchase, driving the
desire for greater choice and access to health services.
In this era of radical technological change and innovation,
the legal and regulatory landscape is undergoing gradual
transformation and harmonisation. The ASEAN Medical
Device Directive is an example of this. The healthcare
industry now faces the issue of “law lag,” as laws are a
number of steps behind technological advances.
We are seeing common themes emerge across Asia Pacific
in legal developments, with a focus on data protection
laws, the regulation and promotion of medical devices,
and the ability to protect, enforce and commercialise
intellectual property. Governments and legislatures are
charged with the challenging task of balancing the need for
effective regulatory compliance with the need to foster and
accelerate innovation and development, as well as to reduce
overall healthcare costs.
The opportunity to power the future of healthcare in Asia
Pacific through technology innovation will transform the
delivery of better healthcare.
In these pages, we illustrate why we believe Asia Pacific
stakeholders have an unprecedented opportunity and we
propose how this could be achieved.
Ben McLaughlin
Head of Asia Pacific Healthcare Group
Baker & McKenzie
Julien de Salaberry
Founder and CIO
The Propell Group

The Creative
Destruction
of Healthcare
Chapter
1
Considered one of the most
inﬂuential economists of the
twentieth century, Joseph
Schumpeter served as Austria’s
ﬁnance minister and became a
professor at Harvard University.
In the mid-twentieth century,
Joseph Schumpeter, the
noted Austrian economist,
popularised the term
“creative destruction” to
denote transformation
that accompanies radical
innovation. Over the past
few years, our lives have
been radically transformed
through digital and technology
innovation. But the most
precious part of our existence—
our health—has thus far been
largely unaffected—insulated,
and almost separated from this
digital revolution. Until now.
Medicine is about to go
through its biggest
shakeup in history.

Asia Pacific’s developing
economies face a significant
and growing challenge to
their ambitions to build an
OECD standard of healthcare
infrastructure and delivery. Two
main challenges face these
economies:
The prohibitive cost
of building such a
healthcare system
The increasing disease
burden ranging from
preventable communicable
diseases to the growing
trend in non-communicable
diseases brought on by
ageing and lifestyles
Asia Pacific’s policy makers must
therefore choose between
two options:
The conventional, long,
expensive and unsustainable
road which developed
economies have been
following
Taking full advantage of the
health technology innovations
and new operating models
which are transforming and
will continue to transform
healthcare across the globe
A founding father of Silicon
Valley, Gordon Moore co-founded
chipmaker Intel in 1968.
You can interpret the term
Moore’s Law in two ways. There is
its original meaning, which refers
to the speed at which transistors
on integrated circuits double.
Alternatively, you can use the
term as a metaphor to describe
any form of rapid technological
advancement. In its metaphorical
sense, Moore’s Law is now one
of the most important rules in
business and the economy today.
To borrow words used by
consultancy firm McKinsey:
Moore’s Law
Today, a human genome
can be sequenced in a few hours
and for a few thousand dollars,
a task that took 13 years
and $2.7 billion to accomplish
during the Human Genome Project.
Or to quote Craig Venter—
one of the leading scientists in
the world today—in a lecture he
gave at the BBC in 2007:
The Innovator’s
Dilemma
First published in 1997,
Christensen’s book suggests
that successful companies
can put too much emphasis on
customers’ current needs, and
fail to adopt new technology or
business models that will meet
their unstated or future needs.
He argues that such companies
will eventually fall behind.
Christensen calls the anticipation
of future needs “disruptive
innovation,” and gives examples
such as the personal computer.
Harvard Business School
Professor Clayton Christensen
is the world’s authority on
disruptive innovation and
was named the World’s Most
Inﬂuential Business Management
Thinker in 2011 and 2013.
The innovator’s “dilemma” comes
from the idea that organisations
will reject innovations based on
the fact that customers cannot
currently use them, thus allowing
these ideas with great potential
to go to waste.
Asia Pacific has a broad spectrum
of health systems and challenges,
with Myanmar at one end after
decades of under investment,
and Japan the opposite end of the
spectrum, with an OECD-standard
health system.
Whatever the level of maturity
of any Asia Pacific economy’s
health system, we advocate that
all of Asia Pacific’s healthcare
stakeholders need to overcome
their innovator’s dilemma
and take full advantage of the
technological advances that
are shaping the new healthcare
paradigm powered by Moore’s
Law.
Over a short period of time
genome projects, which,
10 years ago required
several years to complete,
now take only days.
He suggested that within half a
decade “it will be commonplace
to have your own genome
sequence, something that just
a decade ago required billions
of pounds and was considered a
monumental achievement.” He
said, “Our ability to read genetic
code is changing even faster than
changes predicted by Moore’s
Law.”
Metaphorical Moore’s Law may
yet prove to be even more extreme
in numerous medical disciplines
such as nanotechnology or
synthetic biology.
Two factors enabling
transformation
of healthcare
Factor 1
Factor 2
1
2
1
2
The innovator’s ‘dilemma’
comes from the idea that
organisations will reject innovations
based on the fact that customers
cannot currently use them, thus
allowing these ideas with great
potential to go to waste.
All figures in this report are in US dollars, unless specified otherwise.

CREATIVE
DESTRUCTION
MOORE’S LAW
1950S 1965
Popularised by Austrian
economist Joseph
Schumpeter, this refers
to the transformation
accompanying radical
innovation.
Intel founder Gordon
Moore’s observation
that computing speeds
double every two years,
an idea that can also be
applied to technology and
economics.

INNOVATOR’S DILEMMA THE HEALTHCARE
REVOLUTION
Coined by Harvard
professor Clayton
Christensen, this refers
to companies rejecting
innovations based on
the fact that they cannot
currently be used, with
the ideas ending up going
to waste.
Dramatic changes of
medicine brought about
by mobile connectivity
and bandwidth, Internet,
social networking,
increasing computing
power and data universe,
information systems,
imaging, genomics and
wireless sensors.
1997 2015

The
Healthcare
Revolution
We are set to see a truly radical
change. Healthcare will focus on
prevention. Up to now, healthcare
has always concentrated on
diseases. We only tend to receive
medical attention if we are ill and
usually rely on symptoms to drive
us to seek a qualified medical
opinion. Technology will be used
to prevent us from becoming
sick. It will enhance us all in
ways that were once thought
to be the exclusive domain of
science fiction.
mobile connectivity
and bandwidth
social networkingInternet increasing computing
power and the data
universe
genomics wireless sensorsinformation systems imaging
Dramatic changes
in healthcare—a tectonic shift
Technologies that will create this
transformation include wearable
technology, genome sequencing,
collection, mining and analysis
of big data, 3-D printing,
nanotechnology, regenerative
medicine, bionic technologies,
and exoskeleton technology, to
name but a few. We will, however,
only consider the most relevant
to Asia Pacific in this report.
Nowadays, diseases that kill us
are rarely epidemics as medicine
has been very good at solving
these; instead, each one of us is
at risk of diseases of lifestyle,
e.g.,Type 2 diabetes (T2D). If
we could only make better
decisions about our lifestyle, we
could eliminate a substantial
number of deaths from modern
conditions. This is even more
applicable in an era where good
and comprehensive information is
available.
Technology is set to enable us to
make these decisions. It will also
enable us to enjoy better, more
customised care and live longer
in the future.
The creative destruction of
healthcare is being driven by
the convergence of the following
factors:

Healthcare, which has to date
been exclusively disease centric,
is now becoming prevention
centric or outcomes driven. In
other words, a health system,
which has so far been entirely
focused and geared to curing
or managing a disease, will
transform into one focused
on prevention of disease. This
type of health system is gaining
increasing traction here in Asia
Pacific with economies such
as Australia, Korea and Taiwan
following the lead of economies
such as the UK, Canada and
Japan where health outcomes,
daily average treatment costs
and cost per QALY (qualified
adjusted life years, which is a
generic measure of disease
burden, including both the quality
and quantity of life lived, and
used to assess the value for
money of a medical intervention)
are being assessed as part of the
holistic healthcare consideration.
These advances can be
categorised into three categories
as follows:
One additional non-data-driven
technology innovation which will
have a positive impact on the
delivery of healthcare in Asia
Pacific is 3-D printing. We will
consider its impact in a later
chapter.
DATA
SHARED
INFORMATION
CLOUD
DEVICES
BIO-SENSORS
The variety, veracity,
velocity and volume
of health data that
is being collated and
analysed to define
actionable insights
The ability of the
computing power
and software on
devices to address
both consumer and
medical needs
The ability to monitor
our bodies and
continuously gather
data about human
biology suggests new
possibilities for both
biomedical research
and clinical practice
Healthcare’s
New Paradigm
In this era of the creative
destruction of medicine, we
are also seeing a gradual
transformation of the legal
landscape in response to radical
innovation in medical and
health technology. Traditionally,
the relationship between
technology and the law has been
underscored by the notion of “law
lag,” meaning that legal cultures
are generally a number of steps
behind technological advances.
This is no different for healthcare,
and is particularly relevant to
big data. The ever-increasing
methods of collecting data,
from mobile phone applications
to biosensing wearables to
telemedicine, will challenge the
traditional concepts of “personal
information,” “consent” and
“medical devices.”
Balancing the desire to
unlock potential against the
requirements for regulatory
compliance is another component
of the Innovator’s Dilemma.
Privacy laws regulate how
organisations collect, store,
use and potentially disclose
“personal information” identifying
individuals. Organisations
must ensure that they comply
with these laws, as the legal
consequences of non-compliance
can be substantial, not to mention
the risk of damage to reputation
in the case of a serious data
breach.
In some cases, the regulatory
compliance regime may restrict
or even prevent innovators from
pursuing new ideas, concepts or
technologies. In the alternative,
it is argued that if individuals
do not trust the effectiveness of
data protection laws, they will
be less likely to engage in digital
healthcare, which could threaten
the highly beneﬁcial applications
of technological advances.
Legal regulation must address
these concerns by adopting
appropriate measures
to protect privacy.
We will introduce our readers
to key regulatory compliance
matters, from data protection
laws to the regulation and
promotion of medical devices.
Moreover, we will consider how
companies can add value to
their assets and businesses
by understanding and utilising
intellectual property rights
protection.
What are the Legal Consequences
of the Healthtech Revolution?
Promoting innovation should be
a central objective of data regulation,
yet the unprecedented ability to
collect, analyse and store vast
amounts of data raises new concerns
about individual privacy rights.
The traditional barriers, created
by the lack of inter-operability
(people, process, information)
between stakeholders, are being
dramatically removed or lowered
by advances in technology.
Ben McLaughlin on key implications of
healthtech for healthcare stakeholders

Data-driven
Healthcare
Chapter
2
Thomas Goetz, author of The
Decision Tree: Taking Control of
Your Health in the New Era of
Personalized Medicine, once said:
He is right. Data is of extreme
importance in the delivery of
a more efficient and effective
healthcare system, and healthcare
is becoming even more accessible
like never before in the history of
humanity.
Firstly, it can be small data,
specific to an individual and used
solely to help people manage their
own health, or enable the doctor,
nurse or caregiver to support them
directly. Wearable technology and
advances in genome sequencing
are creating information that can
ensure that we apply healthcare
technology in the most effective
way.
Alternatively, it can be big data,
used by doctors, health insurers,
hospitals and governments in
the planning and execution of
healthcare.
We can use this data to diagnose
diseases more effectively,
implement superior preventive
healthcare, allocate resources
more efficiently and provide
statistics for epidemiological
analysis.
Big data is being made possible in
part by Moore’s Law, as computers
are able to process more and more
information. The cloud is emerging
as a massive repository of medical
data, which can be accessed
by doctors and other medical
professionals. Supercomputers,
such as IBM’s Watson, are now
enabling deep analysis and
evidence-based reasoning for
more precise diagnosis and clinical
decision-making. IBM’s Watson
is capable of reading millions
of unstructured papers in a few
seconds, which will enable it to
process patients’ electronic health
records, genomics, clinical data
and healthcare professionals’
peer-reviewed publications. It is
also able to monitor real-time
data and new articles as they are
published.
Health insurers are using Watson
to speed pre-approval processes
for patients. Leading teaching
hospitals, such as Mayo Clinic in
the US, began working with IBM
Watson to improve medical school
training, in which they collaborate
to offer doctors real-time analysis
of patient records to improve care.
Mobile applications that allow
doctors and medical practitioners
to look up databases containing
information on thousands
of diseases, including signs,
symptoms and lab findings, are
now a reality. The physician often
has to make a diagnosis based on
patient responses to particular
questions and personal knowledge.
This cannot be infinite, resulting in
a need for additional data points.
These are usually laboratory tests
and/or second opinions from a
peer or a referral. In the future, the
access to a wealth of data, artificial
intelligence (AI) analysis, as well as
peer to peer (P2P) will enable more
accurate diagnosis. For example,
uploading a photo of a skin rash
will generate a more accurate
diagnosis through comparison with
other patient cases and research
databases.
It won’t be long before
technology breakthroughs such
as advanced voice recognition
are used in surgeries and other
medical procedures. MindMeld
has developed an application
that enables doctors or other
healthcare professionals such as
nurses to spend less time behind
their computers, encoding or
retrieving data from electronic
health records, thus allowing more
time to counsel their patients.
Combine this with apps that
support a doctor’s diagnosis by
efficiently and quickly analysing
data from the big data cloud and
the patient’s own sensors and
trackers, and the relevance and
accuracy of diagnosis will improve.
Data gives us information.
Information is vital in the war
against disease and in creating
a healthier society and a more
effective health system. But we
need technologies to implement
the findings of data.
Big Data and
Analytics
“Healthcare isn’t a
science problem, it’s an
information problem.”
Advances in computer
technology have created
major possibilities.

Just as the Internet of Things (IOT)
will provide data to transform
our homes, and just as big data
is revolutionising the world of
marketing, both are providing
mankind with the information
required to radically transform
healthcare.
It will provide doctors with the
tools for predictive analysis.
Natural language processing will
also turn the data into insights
about compliance and behaviour,
and doctors will take data from
individual departmental or
hospital silos and use it to gain
a much deeper insight into the
incidence of a particular disease.
Governments can plan better,
allocating resources according
to need and demand, and budget
more effectively. The result will
be significant. Singapore’s Smart
Nation Vision, which aims to
improve lives and businesses
through technology, comes to
mind. The initiative pulls together
world-ranked universities and
medical facilities, multi-billion-
dollar annual research and
development (R&D) investments,
a fast-growing community of
tech start-ups and large pools of
investment capital to bring about
better lives and greater business
opportunities. Health insurance
companies will be able to define
customised policies and premiums
according to individual risk profile.
Equally, consumers and patients
will gain greater visibility within
the complex health system, giving
them greater access to better-
suited and more affordable health
services. That empowerment will
eventually contribute to reducing
the enormous burden on essential
providers such as hospitals.
McKinsey’s recent analysis of the
potential impact of known big
data and analytics advances on
US healthcare spending estimates
potential savings of up to USD450
billion.
Benefits
The shift in the balance between
disease management and early
intervention will very likely have a
broad beneficial economic impact
on healthcare systems across the globe.

In the age of data-driven
healthcare, the ways in which
organisations can collect, store,
personal or sensitive information
are growing exponentially. The
aggregation and analysis of this
data can have substantial economic
value to those who collect it, and as
we can see in the healthcare space,
even society benefits if it is used
properly. Conversely, this push
towards data-driven healthcare
raises significant privacy concerns,
particularly where there is the
potential for an individual’s
sensitive health information to be
disclosed (e.g., in the case of a
serious data breach).
The use of this sensitive
information is typically baselined
against the consent of the
individual to whom the data
relates, being obtained before it
is used for analytical purposes.
This consent requirement is not
necessarily complementary to the
vision of the benefits flowing from
the use of big data in healthcare.
There are, however, some
examples of health information
being exempt from the privacy laws
for purposes relating to research
and development.
Data protection and privacy laws
across Asia Pacific regulate how
organisations use “personal
data” or “personal information”
identifying individuals. Most
businesses now collect, store,
personal information in some
way. Asia Pacific has experienced
solid development in privacy
laws in recent times; however,
each country has its own
implementation and enforcement
systems.
Failure to comply, or responsibility
for a serious data breach, can
also damage an organisation’s
reputation in the market and may
affect their standing with the
relevant government regulatory
body or agency.
There may also be specific
laws or regulations that govern
the collection and handling of
individuals’ health information.
There may be a legally enforceable
right for individuals to access their
health information contained in
records held by private and public
sector healthcare providers. The
application of these laws may
have a broader scope than the
regulation of “medical devices,”
and may apply to health and fitness
mobile apps, wearable devices
and associated software. These
requirements restrict the potential
benefits flowing from the use of big
data in healthcare. However, there
are examples of carve-outs being
created for the collection and use
of big data for specific purposes.
Some jurisdictions (such as
Singapore via the National Registry
of Diseases Act) regulate the
compilation of information relating
to certain diseases for use in
disease prevention. There may be
a duty for healthcare institutions
or practitioners who prescribe
medical devices to patients to
notify the relevant registrar of
reportable diseases (e.g., cancer).
Internal audit
As a company, you must
understand what personal data is
being collected and how it is being
used. In particular, the following
questions must be answered:
Data-driven Healthcare
1. If you collect and use
personal information, have
you checked the regulatory
requirements on consent? If
you have collected the data
from an individual for one
purpose, but now seek to
use it for another, are you
required to seek “fresh”
consent from that individual?
1
2. Do you have appropriate
measures in place to
securely store personal
information and destroy or
de-identify this information
when it is no longer
required?
2
3. Does your company have a
privacy policy, and is it up to
date with your practices?
3
4. If you store personal
information offshore,
have you conducted a due
diligence-style assessment
of the privacy laws of the
recipient country?
4
5. Can you ensure that the
overseas recipient is also
bound by the same laws? Or
will you be liable if there is a
breach in that country, even
if it is completely out of your
control?
5
6. Are you able to negotiate
a data transfer agreement
with the recipient that
addresses matters such as
a data breach response and
notification plan?
6
7. Have you considered using a
data security firm to assist
in protecting the integrity of
the personal information that
you store or use?
7
1. To what extent is personal
information or personal data
being collected? Examples of
personal information include
a patient’s name, address,
medical records and bank
account details.
1
2. Is any “sensitive” information
collected? Some jurisdictions
place strict requirements
on collection and use of
sensitive information,
including health information.
2
3. For what purpose is this
information collected?
The issue of consent by
individuals arises in multiple
jurisdictions. Where an
individual has consented
to the use of his personal
information for a purpose
(or multiple purposes), an
organisation should not use
that information for any
other purpose.
3
4. Is personal information
stored overseas? Some
jurisdictions include
restrictions on disclosing
or transferring personal
information outside of the
“home jurisdiction.” This is a
particularly important issue
for cloud service providers,
which often provide services
to customers in one country,
while basing their operations
in another.
4
Assessing compliance
Based on your answers to the
above questions, you must now
determine the extent of any data
protection compliance issues.
Remember, your company may
be held accountable for serious
data breaches involving personal
information.
The advantages of data-driven
healthcare are clear. However,
individuals and organisations
operating in the healthcare industries
must be aware that, as a general rule,
“health information” is regarded
as sensitive and is more heavily
regulated under the various data
protection regimes.
It is imperative that big data
initiatives and products in
healthcare or otherwise comply with
data protection laws, as the
consequences of non-compliance
range from fines to criminal offences
and enforcement actions.
Privacy Concerns: Regulating
the Collection of Data
What are the key data protection
and privacy considerations for
big data in healthcare?
Case Example: Data Aggregators
in Healthcare
1. Are you required to notify
individuals when a data
breach occurs?
8

Human genome sequencing
provides scientists with a
roadmap of the human body. It is
probably easier to equate this to
understanding the computer code
that governs our body. Just as
computer code can contain bugs,
the human body equivalent would
be a defective protein, which would
leave it predisposed to a disease
such as cancer.
Advances in sequencing the
genome mean that in the next
ten years many rare diseases will
likely be downgraded to becoming
curable diseases. Healthcare
scientists agree that the genomic
breakthrough in cancer treatments
is already underway and
transforming the treatment of the
disease.
Genomics is becoming more
accessible and affordable through
technology advances. A process
that used to cost millions per
person now costs just a few
thousands. Novel business models,
which, for example, just focus on
a speciﬁc therapy area such as
breast cancer, are able to provide
a service to women at a fraction of
the cost of a full DNA sequencing
procedure.
This new area of medicine will have
fundamental impact on how each
one of us will be able to manage
our health, starting with prevention
through disease management.
It will impact most stakeholders
from the patient to the healthcare
professional, drug discovery and
health insurance provider, to name
a few.
5 Ways Big Data is
Changing Healthcare
Genomics1
“Chemotherapy is just medieval,”
says Eric Topol, a leading American
cardiologist, geneticist and researcher.
“It’s such a blunt instrument.
We’re going to look back on it like
we do the dark ages. Tumours can
now be sequenced and drugs tailored
to the individual. It’s the dawn of
personalised medicine.”

With groundbreaking developments
around the world in treating
and curing cancer and rare
diseases, genomics is elevated
above big data initiatives for its
transformative potential. However,
it is not without challenges both
from commercial and medical
perspectives. From a commercial
perspective, there is a need to have
adequate intellectual property right
(IPR) enforcement and protection
systems in place to protect genome
sequencing (via patent registration)
and, by extension, to encourage
R&D investment in this space.
Conversely, the medical
perspective can be a competing
consideration for genomics.
The very concept of obtaining
patent protection over human
genome sequencing and thereby
monopolising rights to methods
of medical treatment could be an
impediment to the full realisation
of genomics’ potential.
The Human Genome Project is a
practical example of the inherent
conflict between genomics and
intellectual property. The project
was designed to generate a
resource that would be freely
available in public databases
and used for a broad range of
biomedical studies. This is in
conflict with the very nature of
the legal monopoly granted by
patent protection. Equally, it is
clear that considerable time,
effort and funding are required
to translate discoveries in the
laboratory to treatment methods in
a medical clinic. Thus, patents are
an important way of encouraging
private funding in science, as they
allow investors the opportunity
to maximise the profit from their
investment.
The patentability of gene
sequences in developed IPR
governance systems such as
those in Australia, the USA and
Europe varies. In late 2015, the
Australian High Court determined
that nucleic acid isolated from
human cells was not patentable
subject matter under Australian
law (see D’Arcy v Myriad Genetics
Inc. (2015) 325 ALR 100). This is
consistent with the position in the
USA where the US Supreme Court
ruled that naturally occurring
nucleic acid is a “product of
nature” and therefore cannot be
patented (see Association for
Molecular Pathology v. Myriad
Genetics Inc. 569 US - (2013)). In
Europe, however, there is no bar
to patenting gene sequences.
The European Union Directive
(98/44/EC) expressly provides
that biological material (including
gene sequences) can be patented
provided the gene sequence
is useful (i.e., susceptible to
industrial application) and this is
disclosed in the patent application.
While patenting gene sequences or
naturally occurring isolated nucleic
acids per se is not permitted in
Australia, the patentability of
gene-related inventions remains
possible. In Myriad, the High Court
of Australia expressly left open the
possibility that, where there is a
new or improved process of nucleic
acid isolation or where an invention
consists of the application of
isolated nucleic acid to a particular
use, that method of isolation or use
may be patentable.
Genomics

Telemedicine
The increasing use and availability
of telemedicine (or telehealth) is an
important example of how big data
is changing the face of healthcare.
Telemedicine refers to the
systematic provision of healthcare
services over physically separate
environments via an electronic
communications network. This
exchange of healthcare information
between patients and healthcare
providers (for diagnostic and
clinical purposes) can be over the
telephone, through text messaging,
email, smart phone application
or other telecommunications
technology.
Telemedicine has been used in
Asia Pacific for close to a decade,
and the regulatory environment is
finally catching up. For example,
in Singapore, new National
Telemedicine Guidelines (NTG),
covering a wide scope of services,
were recently issued by the
Singapore Ministry of Health.
The NTG distinguishes between
healthcare organisations and
healthcare professionals involved
in the provision of telemedicine and
imposes different obligations on
each group.
From a legal perspective, the
development of telemedicine as a
viable method of providing medical
services raises various regulatory
issues. For example, in the future,
will we see telecommunication/
Internet service provider (ISP)
companies face liability for
failing to adequately facilitate
these services? Or will the
telecommunications industry
also be required to comply with
laws regulating the provision of
therapeutic services?
Given the potential for vast
amounts of personal and/or
sensitive health information
to be transferred using
telecommunications technology,
telemedicine also raises concerns
in relation to privacy and data
protection. As with conventional
medicine, a clinician practicing
in telemedicine has the same
duties to safeguard a patient’s
medical records and maintain
confidentiality. However, the
unique challenge for telemedicine
clinicians is to manage the
increasing number of people
who will potentially have access
to a patient’s records and to
ensure that protocols are strictly
followed to ensure the integrity of
data and images transmitted for
the purposes of a telemedicine
consultation.
However, telemedicine raises
several legal issues, such as data
privacy and licensing for cross-
border services, that each jurisdiction
must confront and develop a
framework for.

2 Data Analytics
Healthcare data analytics
makes extensive use of data,
statistical and qualitative analysis,
explanatory and predictive
modelling. It is the process of
working with and mixing data
sets so as to transform data into
useful insights to support decision-
making.
This is being compounded by rapid
growth of data with some 90% of
the data available today having
been created in the last two years
alone, according to IBM.
Digitising the files from the
hospitals’ or physicians’ notes is
the core of the electronic health
(or medical) record (a.k.a. EHR
or EMR). The ideal EHR would
be a comprehensive file that
includes all laboratory data as
well as reports from procedures,
operations, diagnostic tests,
hospital discharges and visits with
all healthcare practitioners. The
launch of smart phone applications
will allow the patient to have their
own personal health record (PHR),
which would ensure it is accessible
everywhere or when needed.
Initiatives in the US to digitise
these records have delivered
impressive results such as a 41%
reduction in error rate and a 51%
reduction of adverse drug events in
just one hospital.
If we consider the enormous
burden placed on hospitals in most
countries across the world, using
big data and predictive analytics
tools will provide much needed
decision support tools to reduce
cost, improve the quality of care
and improve outcomes through
smart operational improvements
in hospitals through focus on the
following:
1. Reducing readmissions by
identifying high-risk patients
and readmission time
2. Workforce planning for
optimal nurse scheduling
3. Maximising hospital
resources such as bed and
operating rooms
4. Optimising elective
admissions schedules to
reduce midweek congestion
and bed block
5. Scheduling operating rooms
efficiently to coordinate
patient care paths
1
2
3
4
5
The single greatest challenge
facing healthcare data analytics is
fragmentation of the available data.

3 Public Awareness: Planning & Preventing
One of the biggest causes of
disease in developing economies is
a lack of awareness of the diseases
(both communicable and non-
communicable) and their causes.
For example, diabetes prevalence
in India is as high as 10% of the
population (WHO) but fewer than
1% seek counsel from a healthcare
professional. Often enough,
they seek consultation once the
symptoms are quite advanced.
Current costs prevent routine
health checks for the majority
of the population in developing
economies.
Mobile device penetration is
extremely high in Asia Paciﬁc,
facilitating both push-and-pull
health and wellness information to
be communicated or exchanged.
In many Asia Paciﬁc economies,
the presence of counterfeit
medicine further reduces the
effectiveness of the healthcare
system. For example, up to 50% of
anti-malarial drugs in Cambodia
are fake, leading to many patients
being poisoned. Mobile devices
provide a simple solution to
verifying the authenticity of the
medicine being purchased similar
to countering credit card fraud.
The use of mobile technology
in collaboration with a well-thought-
through disease awareness
campaign would enable the effective
use of data to reduce and prevent
disease.

4
The power of today’s computers
combined with the major advances
in analytics, such as machine
learning, is making it possible to
blend a greater variety of data to
generate clinical and non-clinical
intelligence.
IBM’s Watson supercomputer
has the capability to analyse vast
amounts of data on a cloud-based
platform that puts the power
of the analysis in the hands of
physicians, researchers, insurance
actuaries and other non-technical
users. Using advanced technical
capabilities, such as artificial
intelligence and machine learning
algorithms, the system responds to
clinical queries in natural language
and comes up with responses
based on medical evidence that is
gathered and constantly analysed
in the system.
In May 2015, IBM Watson Health
announced a major push into
the healthcare analytics space
through strategic partnerships
with Mayo Clinic, one of the leading
hospitals and medical research
institutions in the US, and Epic,
a provider of Electronic Health
Record (EHR) systems with access
to vast amounts of patient medical
records. IBM has been aggressively
pursuing access to patient data
to feed the Watson engine, more
recently through the acquisition
of Explorys and Phytel. These
acquisitions and partnerships
deepen IBM’s commitment
to extend Watson’s cognitive
computing power to advance the
quality of healthcare, specifically
in areas such as cancer prediction
and treatment.
Similarly, new entrants in
healthcare such as Google or
Flatiron Health are focused on
linking and analysing all the patient
and research data of a specific
disease area such as oncology to
develop insights to significantly
improve research and treatment.
Support Providers

5 Support Self-Care/Digital Therapeutics
The rapidly expanding ownership
of smart devices (over 1 billion
Android devices worldwide)
equipped with a growing number
of built-in sensors and the growing
versatility of wearables (which
we discuss in the next section)
are making patient-empowered
disease and pre-disease
management a reality through the
combination of customised apps
and the increasing variety and
frequency of patient-centric data.
In the past few years, a handful
of medically minded visionaries
have put real clinical rigor into
every aspect of their disease
management application design.
For instance, David Van Sickle,
a former CDC epidemiologist
intelligence officer, and now the
CEO and co-founder of Propeller
Health, built a GPS-enabled sensor
for asthma inhalers that links to
a mobile device app — every puff
is mapped and time-stamped,
allowing patients and doctors to
spot patterns in “random” attacks
and identify previously unknown
triggers.
For the first time in its history,
the World Health Organization’s
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) has recognised
digital therapeutics as meeting
the evidence-based standards for
the agency’s National Diabetes
Prevention Program (DPP) when
it listed Omada Health as an
effective diabetes management
aid in March 2015.
We will likely see physicians
prescribing regulation-approved
apps not just to monitor and
manage chronic disease but also
to pre-empt acute disease events.
Preventing individuals from
progressing to more advanced
diabetes status through device-
based therapies or behavioural
change would have a significant
impact.
We should also consider the
beneficial impact of this type of
technology on improving disease
awareness in a region where a
small fraction of individuals at risk
or with a chronic disease actually
consult a healthcare professional.
The high prevalence of chronic
diseases in Asia Pacific warrants
the need for similar behavioural
change digital programs
customised to be appropriate to
differing levels of income and device
sophistication, among others.

First-generation consumer
wearables were built with just one
sensor (accelerometer), and they
are already making a difference.
Wearable devices from Fitbit or
Jawbone can, for example, tell us
how active we are in a day, or a
week or a month. They can also
estimate the quality of our sleep.
More to the point, such products
encourage us to improve our
habits and/or behaviour through
gamification. This can involve
incentivising and rewarding
people to meet pre-set goals
using techniques often used in
games, for example, rewards, or
a progress bar, in addition to peer
pressure via social media.
Next-generation wearable
biosensors such as smart
watches, smart clothing, jewelry,
patches and wearable tattoos
are emerging and are able to
capture physiological data such as
movement, respiration, hydration,
glucose, skin conductivity, heart
rate, temperature, posture, oxygen
level, muscle activity and blood
pressure.
Next-generation wearable
biosensor technologies will be
embedded in our clothes, homes
and cars, and other places we
regularly frequent or use.
Biosensing
Wearables
Biosensors
Devices that convert a
biological element into
a signal output
Activity
Trackers
e.g., Fitbit, Misfit
Smart
Watches
e.g., Garmin
Patches and
Tattoos
e.g., Zio, MC10
Smart
Clothing
e.g., Athos
Ingestibles and
Smart Implants
e.g., Proteus
Wearables
On- or in-body devices
that enable user
experience
Chronic diseases, such as
diabetes, can also be better self-
managed with apps, in tandem
with specific wearable biosensors
such as a glucose meter that helps
to measure carb intake, calculate
administered insulin quantity and
receive tips on diet and lifestyle
modifications essential for slowing
down the progress of the disease.
The combination of biosensors
and advanced data analytics is
rapidly democratising the access
to personal health data as well as
access to complex computational
capability and placing it in people’s
hands. They are effectively
transferring power from the hands
of scientists and academics to
ordinary citizens.
A very similar revolution is taking
place in the medical device
environment. Take for example
AliveCor, a peripheral attached to
a smart phone that enables users
to record and share their own
electrocardiograms (ECG/EKG).
Amongst other things, this device
will probably spell the demise of
the stethoscope. Doctors prescribe
the device for at-home use so that
they can regularly monitor patients
remotely. Today, if patients do
not have the symptoms of heart
disease it is generally assumed
that they don’t have the disease.
Home use would enable a doctor
to track whether a patient’s at-
rest heart rate is rising over a
prolonged period of time and
therefore tackle potential heart
disease early. This way, patients
can also determine whether the
therapy they have been prescribed
is effective.
Imagine slapping a sticker on
your arm that could measure a
wide array of medical indicators
— heart rate, body temperature,
blood pressure and more — and
transmitting that data wirelessly
to your smartphone. MC10 is
developing products that can be
used both on and inside the body,
that monitor head impact, heart
rate, brain activity, muscle function,
body temperature and hydration.
It is also developing an entirely
new class of intelligent medical
device with embedded sensors for
enhanced sensing and therapeutic
capabilities. Looking forward
a few more years, combine this
with advances in nanotechnology,
and the same sticker will also be
able to release drugs stored inside
nanoparticles when data from the
sensors suggest it is required.
This technology will fundamentally
change the way in which medicine
is administered and how chronic
diseases such as Parkinson’s are
managed.
We have deliberately not addressed
other significant scientific
advances such as regenerative
medicine, stem cell research and
nanotechnology, as these are
regarded to not be sufficiently
advanced to have an impact on Asia
Pacific’s health system in the short
to medium term.
Thanks to advances in the
computing power of handheld
devices, combined with an
increasing number of sensors
built into them, it is becoming both
practical and realistic for patients
to manage their own healthcare in a
way that was never possible before.
What data privacy and compliance
issues arise from biosensing
wearables?

Mobile Devices
Health
Recently published research
estimates mobile phone
penetration in Asia Pacific to reach
70% of the population by 2019. This
will continue to grow as countries
such as Myanmar build their
mobile phone network and their
population comes online. Smart
phone adoption is also growing fast
as new handset manufacturers
(e.g., Xiaomi in China or Micromax
in India) enter the market with
state-of-the-art devices for
USD250 or less.
Tablet ownership has also recorded
significant growth in many Asia
Pacific countries.
As Thomas Goetz put it, healthcare
is about information. We are
all looking for data to inform
our personal and professional
decisions, e.g., shopping, dining
out and booking taxis. Delivering
better healthcare in Asia Pacific
should be no different. Mobile
devices enable this by giving the
health system the ability to do the
following:
1. Provide health information
and education
2. Communicate broadly and
directly with the population
on health matters
3. Engage directly with the
population on health matters
related to them
It has the power to break down the
barrier between healthcare and the
consumer/patient-democratising
healthcare.
A poignant example of its impact
relates to infant mortality in the
region. Countries such as India
and Indonesia have failed to meet
their United Nations Millenium
Development Goal (MDG) to
reduce infant mortality. The infant
mortality rate in India is three
times higher than China’s and
seven times greater than that
of the US. There are numerous
causes of infant mortality, but
an important one is insufficient
maternal health.
A leading consumer goods
manufacturer launched a program
that works with mothers and
community leaders to educate
them on basic health practices
such as washing hands with soap
daily, particularly before handling
newborn infants.
This very successful program
provided mothers of newborn
infants with free-of-charge
awareness and education modules
via their mobile phones specifically
designed to address rural areas
where most handsets are still
unsophisticated. The company also
adjusted its soap pack size to cater
to the daily cash flow limitations
that exist in rural areas.
Overall mothers and infants have
benefited and the consumer goods
company has generated revenue
and brand awareness with a new
customer segment. It is a great
template for other healthcare
stakeholders as we aim to improve
healthcare in the lower echelons of
the income pyramid.
1
2
3

Mobile health, now known as
“mHealth,” has been identified
by the World Health Organization
as having “the potential to
transform the face of health
service delivery across the globe.”
The rise in the use of mHealth
in developing countries presents
significant risks in countries where
privacy laws are non-existent or
inconsistent. To address these
risks, Baker & McKenzie and
Merck partnered with the United
Nations Foundation’s mHealth
Alliance and the Thomson Reuters
Foundation’s TrustLaw to develop
“Patient Privacy in a Mobile World:
A Framework to Address Privacy
Law Issues in Mobile Health” (June
2013). This pioneering initiative
covers mHealth-related privacy
and security issues around the
globe.
A key purpose of the mHealth
Alliance Report was to review
privacy and security policies
around the world and to identify
gaps in these policies that must
be addressed to protect personal
health information. The mHealth
Framework states that privacy
laws are roughly split among (1)
omnibus data protection (i.e.,
laws that regulate all personal
information, as in Europe), (2)
sectoral privacy laws that address
privacy issues in specific industries
and business sectors (as in
the US), and (3) constitutional
protections, where there is a
human right to the protection of
personal information.
The mHealth Framework sets
out a functional framework for
addressing these privacy law
gaps, and is sensitive to different
cultural, technological and
institutional contexts.
mHealth
Notably, the results of the mHealth
Framework indicate that few existing
laws make reference to mHealth or
other technological advances in
healthcare.

The development of applications
assisting in the diagnosis and
treatment of medical conditions
can give rise to regulatory
requirements. In particular,
some jurisdictions have provided
guidance that mobile apps with
therapeutic application, or
marketed as having therapeutic
application, could be regarded
as “medical devices” under the
applicable regulatory regimes.
Is it a “medical device”?
Several jurisdictions in Asia Pacific
have extended the definition
of “medical device” to capture
a large number of healthcare
technologies, including smart
phone applications, blood pressure
monitors, diagnostic software
and disposable cell testing
devices. In some instances, these
technologies may need to be
registered with a government
body or agency before they can
be imported, exported or made
available in the market.
Generally, medical devices will
be any article or object (including
software) that is intended to
diagnose, prevent, monitor or treat
a disease or injury in humans.
Some countries, such as Malaysia,
require all medical devices to be
registered with the Ministry of
Health, while other countries, such
as Australia, may take a “risk-
based” approach to regulation. This
means that the level of scrutiny
and oversight by the government
body or agency will vary according
to the level of risk that the product
represents to the patient or
physician using it.
In some cases, whether a product
is considered to be a “medical
device” will depend on (a) the
intention of the manufacturer or
supplier, and/or (b) how they will
market (or have marketed) their
product. We see this illustrated in
the treatment of wearable devices
and other devices developed for
use in relation to “quantified self”
health information by different
regulatory regimes across Asia
Pacific. In some jurisdictions,
devices marketed as being used
for sporting activities are exempt
from regulation; however, a
largely similar device, which was
marketed as having more general
application, may not be able to
take advantage of this exemption
and could therefore be subject to
regulation (despite having similar
or identical functionality).
In contrast, in jurisdictions such
as Australia that regulate devices
having therapeutic application,
a device may be subject to
regulation if it is marketed as
having a purpose relating to
diagnosis, prevention, monitoring,
treatment or alleviation of disease,
for example. If the device is not
marketed this way, it will not
be regulated. In late 2014, the
Australian regulator clarified that
the definition of a medical device
includes “software programs or
operating instructions that control
the functioning of an electronic
device such as smart phone
apps.” The key consideration is
whether the app simply presents
information to users (in which
case it is unlikely to be a medical
device) or whether the app has a
therapeutic or diagnostic use, for
example, by way of a monitoring
or diagnostic function (in which
case it is likely to be classified as a
medical device).
However, an app regulated as a
medical device in its own right and
developed for use in conjunction
with an unregulated wearable or
quantified-self device is unlikely
to extend regulation to the device
and is likely to be seen by the
regulator as extending “beyond the
intended use” of the manufacturer,
and therefore the device itself can
still be treated as a consumer
electronic device and not a medical
device.
Promotion, advertising and
other marketing of medical and
healthcare technologies is closely
scrutinised in most jurisdictions
to protect patients, consumers
and healthcare professionals.
Generally, most countries in
Asia Pacific will prohibit any
commercial conduct that is
misleading or deceptive, in addition
to specific prohibitions relating to
the healthcare industries.
1. In Australia, the Therapeutic
Goods Advertising Code
2007 regulates the
advertising and promotion
of certain therapeutic
goods, including “medical
devices,” and contains a
number of prohibitions and
requirements.
2. In China, the Advertising
Law (administered by the
State Administration for
Industry and Commerce)
provides that advertisements
published through the
mass media should be
marked as such, and be
differentiated from other
non-advertising information,
so that consumers are
not confused or misled.
The Advertising Law also
requires all advertisements
containing drug names and
the ailment or symptoms to
undergo examination before
publication.
3. In Hong Kong, the
Undesirable Medical
Advertisements Ordinance
(Cap 231) restricts the
advertising of abortion,
medicines, surgical
equipment and treatment for
curing or preventing certain
diseases or conditions.
“Medical devices” will often be
subject to the same legislation as
medicinal or other therapeutic
products. However, the specific
prohibitions on advertising of
medicine (particularly prescription
medicine) to healthcare
professionals and consumers
generally will not extend to
medical devices. For example, a
requirement that advertisements
for prescription medicines be
pre-approved by the government
agency may not apply for medical
devices. However, this differs
between jurisdictions, and one
must carefully review applicable
advertising laws and codes before
commercialising a product. Some
countries, such as Japan, even
allow advertising of prescription
medicines on television direct
to consumers, provided such
advertising is not misleading
and encourages responsible
consumption.
Be aware that in some cases,
the advertising codes may be
developed and published by
industry bodies (such as the
Medical Technology Association of
Australia), which do not have any
formal regulatory function but can
be either binding upon members or
set the baseline for best practice in
that jurisdiction.
3
Assessing Whether New
Technology is Subject to
Regulatory Compliance
Therefore, when dealing with any
medtech product, the key question
to ask is, is the product considered
to be a “medical device” in this
jurisdiction?
1
2
Promotion

Funding
Chapter
3
In one of the better-known scenes
from the film Jerry Maguire (1996),
Rod Tidwell has Jerry Maguire
repeatedly bellowing “Show me
the money” down the phone in
order to remain Tidwell’s agent.
Many observers of the emerging
healthtech revolution will likely
utter the same words.
A study of the flow of venture
funding into the healthtech sector,
essential to the growth of new
solutions and business models,
reveals significant activity in the
last few years.
Healthtech is among the more
exciting up-and-coming industries
these days, alongside the likes
of virtual reality/augmented
reality, artificial intelligence and
Blockchain. Not only are old
markets like health insurance
being disrupted and changed,
but new industries like digital
therapeutics have sprung to life
with the advent of biosensors.
Venture capitalists have taken
notice and have been pumping
funding to these new ventures,
totaling $13.4 billion since the
beginning of 2011.
Although venture capital firms
have been investing in this sector
for some time, the activity has
notably increased in recent years.
2014 Global Healthtech
Funding Rockets
Healthtech funding in 2014 not only
broke all records, but it quadrupled
from 2011, doubled from 2013, and
exceeded the prior three years
combined, closing at $4.1 billion.
In tandem, the number of deals
completed has tripled since 2011.
What Does Following
Investment Funding
Tell Us?
Global Overview
Key highlights:
Key investment themes are
taking shape - the top five
categories being:
» Analytics and big data -
$393 million
» Healthcare consumer
engagement - $323 million
» Digital medical devices -
$312 million
» Telemedicine - $285 million
» Personalised medicine -
$268 million
The six largest deals in 2014
saw further rounds in 2015:
» NantHealth ($375 million) -
Series B - Kuwait Investment
Authority
» Proteus ($172 million) - Series
G – undisclosed investor(s).
In previous funding rounds,
Proteus has been backed
by the Carlyle Group , Essex
Woodlands, Kaiser Permanente,
Medtronic Inc., Oracle Corp .
and ON Semiconductor Corp.,
VentureWire records show. The
company’s two main strategic
partners, Novartis AG and Otsuka
Pharmaceutical Corp., are also
investors
» Flatiron ($130 million) - Series B
- Google Ventures
» Alignment Healthcare ($125 million)
- Private equity, undisclosed
» Invitae ($120 million) - Series F -
14, different investors
There were 95 healthtech
M&A transactions in 2014,
which reflect increasing
interest from corporates and
strategics in the sector:
» 46 M&A deals in healthtech
alone, with blue-chip players
such as Aetna, GE, Medtronic,
AstraZeneca and Facebook
making acquisitions
Strong IPO trend building
with five healthtech ventures
going public in 2014
10,000+ healthtech start-ups
estimated across the globe
2015 Global Healthtech Funding
Maintains Momentum
Many healthtech investment
data sources and conclusions
exist. Much of this variance is
due to the range of different
definitions of what constitutes
healthtech. Health 2.0, a new
health technology catalyst, reports
healthtech funding numbers for
2015 at $4.75 billion. Rock Health,
a venture fund focused on digital
health, had assessed the number
at $4.3 billion; Mercom Capital
estimates it at $4.6 billion and
both CB Insights, a data analytics
company, and StartUp Health, a
leading healthtech incubator, have
pegged it at $5.8 billion.
Although these reported
numbers differ primarily driven
by definitions, they tell the story
that healthtech investment is
maintaining a steady momentum
and expected to grow in maturity in
2016.
For reference, StartUp
Health has it dropping $1.2
billion, Rock Health has it
holding steady and Health
2.0 actually records a slight
increase from $4.6 billion in
2014.
In an effort to remain conservative
and due to their definitions, we
have used Rock Health’s analysis
as our primary source.
2015 Healthtech Summary
Key highlights:
Venture capital (VC) funding
globally for healthtech
totalled an average of
$4.5 billion in 2015, which
sees 2015 edge ahead of
2014. The number of deals
completed in 2015 decreased
marginally, driven by larger
late-stage deals Series C
and beyond.
Top six healthtech themes
attracting the lion’s share of
funding include:
» Healthcare consumer
engagement – $629 million
» Wearables and biosensors –
$499 million
» Personal health tools and
tracking – $409 million
» Payer administration –
$263 million
» Telemedicine – $236 million
» Care coordination – $208 million
Among the 27 countries
with recorded healthtech
deals, 19% of funding came
from outside the US. Top
VC healthtech companies,
defined by number of deals
completed in 2015, include:
» Guahao (China) – $394 million
» NantHealth (USA) – $200 million
» ZocDoc (USA) – $130 million
» Helix (USA) – $100 million
» Practo (India) – $90 million
Close to 900 investors
participated in healthtech
deals in 2015, up 25% in
2014. Fifty-one VC firms
closed three or more deals
in 2015. Corporate/strategic
investors were increasingly
active. Top VC investors in
2015 include:
» New Enterprise Associates (NEA)
» Rock Health
» Merck GHI
» Venrock
Five healthtech IPOs in 2015
raising a combined $1.2
billion:
» FitBit – $732 million
» Teladoc – $158 million
» Invitae – $102 million
» Evolent – $195 million
» MindBody – $101 million
There were 187 healthtech
M&A transactions in 2015,
nearly doubling from 2014
and indicating an increasing
consolidation in the sector.
In the venture capital industry, each round of
financing for a new business is referred to as
a “series.” The type of series (A, B, C) helps
investors know where they are in terms of
claiming future profits for a company. To better
understand this cycle, read David Newton’s
article, “Understanding the Financial Stages,” in
https://www.enterprenuer.com/article/42336

Opportunities in Asia Pacific
One of the drivers for
entrepreneurs and investors to
start and scale a business is the
size of a market and an unmet
need within it. According to Frost &
Sullivan, total healthcare spending
in Asia Pacific is expected to
reach $2.2 trillion in 2018, which
represents a huge opportunity.
The good news is that the purchase
power of many of these individuals
is also growing fast and will
continue to do so for the next 20
to 30 years. Average GDP per
capita in developing Asia Pacific
remains significantly below OECD
economies.
Many Asia Pacific countries,
however, have very under-
developed healthcare
infrastructure, which limits access
to a good standard of healthcare.
For example, India has 0.5 doctors
per thousand of population,
whereas the US has 3. This is
compounded by largely unmet
medical needs. For example,
Indonesia has 150 coronary
disease-related deaths per
hundred thousand, whereas France
has 29.2.
Healthtech therefore represents
a substantial opportunity for
all healthcare stakeholders
and investors. Key investment
categories in healthtech include
digital therapeutics, data and
analytics, and diagnostics, to name
a few.
Going forward, in addition to the
continued growth in momentum
in the healthtech space driven by
compelling start-ups and their
products and investors hungry
for attractive deals at sensible
valuations, we will also see
increased activity from corporates,
both incumbents and new entrants,
and from governments with
initiatives such as Singapore’s
Smart Nation.
Asia Pacific Healthtech Landscape
Over the past three years,
healthtech in Asia Pacific has
evolved from a nascent one to a
thriving ecosystem. This increasing
momentum, driven by the following
key factors, reflects the hierarchy
of needs within the health
ecosystem:
Lifestyle and wellness apps
driven by growing middle-
class affluence
Chronic disease
management driven by
growing health awareness
Frugal innovation enabling
better care at an affordable
price point
Growing demand for senior
healthcare products and
services
Consumers seeking a wide
range of healthcare solutions
and value for money
When compared to its regional
neighbours, Singapore punches
above its weight in terms of the
number of healthtech start-
ups operating from the island.
Singapore represents a natural
go-to point for entrepreneurs and
investors alike due to its stable
economic and legal environment as
well as its significant investment in
biomedical facilities over the past
30 years.
We expect the enthusiasm
Singapore has demonstrated for
both biotech and medical devices
to be echoed in healthtech.
Noteworthy Asia Pacific Healthtech
Deals 2014-2015
Guahao (China) raised a
$394 million series D from
Tencent and Goldman Sachs
Practo (India) raised a
$90 million series C from
Sequoia Capital, Google and
Tencent
Portea (India) raised a
$37.5 million series B from
Qualcomm, IFC and Accel
Partners
Meet You (China) raised a
$35 million series C from
Matrix Partners and K2
Ventures
PICOOC (China) raised a
$25 million series B from
Tencent and Gobi Partners
ConnexionsAsia (Singapore)
raised an $8 million series A
from Northstar and BioVeda
These only represent a small
number of the many healthtech
venture deals completed in Asia
Pacific in the past 18 months.
Mature Asia Pacific economies such
as Japan face very similar healthcare
challenges to their fellow OECD
nations. Each one of them needs
to continue to define how they will
continue to deliver high healthcare
standards despite an ageing population
and dwindling workforce.
In contrast with the mature markets
where most healthcare costs are
reimbursed, healthcare expenses in
Asia Pacific are usually an out-of-
pocket cost for the individual who is
therefore looking for choice and cost
effectiveness.
Singapore’s commitment to become
a leading regional innovation hub
positions it as an ideal platform for
healthtech innovation leadership.
Accelerators and Incubators
Over 100 accelerators and
incubators have been launched
across Asia Pacific in the
past three years, contributing
significantly to fostering the early-
stage venture ecosystem across
the region. Until recently, virtually
none were 100% focused on
healthtech, but this is changing.
In 2015, we witnessed the launch
of three new accelerators/
incubators dedicated to healthcare.
The most advanced of these three
is the AIA Accelerator (powered by
Nest), which ran its first cohort of
eight healthtech start-ups in mid-
2015. This attracted 76 applications
from 16 countries around the
world, even though no upfront
funding was offered. Building on
this success, AIA has teamed up
with Konica Minolta to launch
another healthtech accelerator in
Singapore.
As proven by the queen of
entrepreneur ecosystems,
Silicon Valley, the development
and fostering of quality early-
stage ventures requires all
key stakeholder groups to play
a catalyst role. Corporates
and strategics have begun
stepping into the Asia Pacific
healthtech sector, with insurance
companies leading the charge.
For example, in addition to the
previously mentioned AIA, Metlife
has launched its own internal
incubator, Lumen Lab, which has
a deliberate healthtech focus.
Healthcare industry incumbents
have remained, so far, on the
sidelines in Asia Pacific despite
their activities in other regions,
such as in the USA. The boldest
amongst them have recently
started their journey to better
understand the ecosystem.
Healthtech represents a unique
opportunity for all investor types
to create sustainable social and
monetary value across Asia Pacific.

Looking Forward
“Eighty-five percent of technology
companies and venture capitalists
surveyed say disrupting healthcare is a
top strategic priority.”
– Accenture report entitled
“Silicon Valley’s New Darling: Healthcare”
(2 February 2016)
Four key drivers will continue
the convergence of tech with
healthcare:
1. Sizeable value pool – Forbes’
investment report last
September listed healthtech
as the “most profitable
industry.”
2. Technology disrupting
other sectors – New
entrant traction in public
transport (e.g., Uber) and
accommodation (e.g., Airbnb)
has attracted the attention
of established technology
players (e.g., Qualcomm) as
well as new entrants (e.g.,
Proteus).
3. Funds and credibility –
Enabling household names
such as Google to build top-
quality healthcare teams
(i.e., clinical).
4. Lowered barriers – The
FDA’s decision, in its 2014
guidelines on healthtech, to
not enforce regulations akin
to drug- or medical device-
type regulations is lowering
the entry barrier for new
entrants.
Key areas of growth for
technology’s convergence with
healthcare will likely include:
5. Access to healthcare
6. Cost control and
transparency
7. Disease management
8. Workforce shortage
9. Hospital administration and
operations
10. Population health
11. Wellness
Conclusion
The healthtech revolution in
Asia Pacific will have a massive
positive impact on everyone
in the healthcare ecosystem.
Similar needs, expectations and
challenges exist across both
developed and developing Asia
Pacific.
China’s healthcare ecosystem
will benefit greatly from its
government’s directives; however,
it is likely that, in the short term,
the remainder of developing Asia
Pacific will need to rely on private
enterprise and consumers to drive
the much-needed transformation.

Legal Point of View: Funding
Traditional funding typically
involves loans from financial
institutions, government funding
or subsidies, private funding or
going public and listing on a stock
exchange.
Bank loans require regular
repayments and smaller start-ups
may not be able to do so, especially
at the early stages where there
may be no steady streams of cash
flow, since a lot of investment
is required before there may be
any results. With the lack of a
track record and uncertain future
earnings from products that are
still works in progress, a public
offering and listing may also be
less feasible for a small start-up
firm.
In this section, we focus on
the sources of funds that are
more accessible for smaller
corporations, namely private
funding and crowdfunding.
In the case of healthtech companies
seeking funding, while many options
are available for well-established firms,
for the smaller and newer start-ups,
access to some of these methods may
be limited for various reasons.
Funding considerations for
healthtech start-ups

Private Funding
This method of funding largely
involves investments from angel
investors or venture capitalists
keen on being at the forefront
of new and innovative products,
even from untested start-ups.
The investors may involve a single
firm, or multiple firms, with a
lead investor firm running the
transaction.
Multiple series of funding could
be involved with each start-up,
and investors are willing to give
the start-up a few years to show
returns of their investment. As co-
investors, the angels or VCs may
or may not take on active advisory
roles. Investee businesses should
note that depending on the terms
of the agreements that they enter
into, certain decision-making
processes may only be made with
the approval of its co-investors.
This may affect the extent of
their autonomy in the control and
management of activities.
Some of these requirements
include the ability for the
representative of the investor to
take up a position on the board of
directors, requiring the start-up to
have a minimum paid-up capital,
having an advisor experienced in
the industry consulting with the
start-up, at least one full-time
founder tobeinvolved inthestart-up,
investments by the founder(s) in
the start-up and no or minimal
investments from other external
parties.
There is a growing number of angel
and VC funding options available
in Asia Pacific in recent years, and
millions of dollars have been made
available to start-ups through
such private funding. We note a
large interest from angels and
VCs especially in healthcare and
technology industries, and believe
that healthtech is compatible with
the general sectors of interest to
various angels and VCs.
Crowdfunding
Increasingly, several healthtech
start-ups, especially in the USA,
have turned to crowdfunding
platforms for funding, such
as Indiegogo, MedStartr,
VentureHealth and Healthfundr.
Donation-based or rewards-based
crowdfunding (also referred to
as community crowdfunding) are
generally less regulated in Asia
Pacific as there are no offers of
returns or potential returns to
donors. Various crowdfunding
platforms are accessible to the
public across Asia Pacific and
many start-ups actively utilise
these avenues for fundraising.
Such crowdfunding from a
healthcare perspective is still less
commonplace in Asia, but with the
prevalence in the USA, it would
only be a matter of time before it
gains ground in the sphere.
Crowdfunding that involves a
financial return includes lending-
based and equity-based aspects.
These methods of fundraising
would be subject to the relevant
securities laws, which would result
in various restrictions or licensing
requirements. Malaysia, Singapore,
Thailand and Indonesia have
implemented or are in the process
of implementing regulations
to facilitate the establishment
of equity crowdfunding while
ensuring investor protection.
Concerns raised by regulators
include the risks associated with
investing in start-ups, which do
not guarantee success, and the
illiquidity of these investments.
The regulations, or proposed
regulations, across Asia Pacific
generally allow institutional or
accredited investors to participate
in equity-based crowdfunding, and
some limit the amount of retail
participation, if at all.
While Asia Pacific seeks to find
its equilibrium between giving a
hand to budding entrepreneurs
and safeguarding investors in
the coming years, healthtech
organisations should engage all
avenues available to them. But
start-ups should also make sure
that they don’t fall foul of both local
laws where they are based or the
foreign securities laws that may
apply to potential investors.
Certain investors may have
requirements that must be met before
they would consider investing in the
enterprise, in order to protect their
interests and to ensure that the
start-up moves in the right direction
to minimise the chance of failure.
As crowdfunding is a relatively new
concept in Asia Pacific, crowdfunding
regulations are still being implemented
at different stages across the region,
and the legal consequences arising from
these new regulations are still untested.

Legal Point of View: How to
Utilise Intellectual Property
(IP) Laws to Add Value to
Your Technology
Innovators and organisations
alike should be alert to, and take
advantage of, the various ways in
which IP protection can add value
to their assets and businesses.
Assets such as software,
processes, business plans, client
lists, logos, designs, inventions
and others, are often considered
as mere working material and
are not protected. However, this
could lead to a loss of the immense
value they represent for innovators
and organisations alike. IP rights
give the owner the right (and in
some jurisdictions, the obligation)
to invest in, sell or licence their
innovation over a certain period of
time. In most jurisdictions, these
rights are enforceable through the
courts, which have the authority to
stop IP infringement.
It is imperative that patent and
trademark applications are made,
and registrations granted before
an invention enters the market.
In particular, if you are planning
to obtain patent protection, your
invention must not be disclosed to
anyone unless they have signed a
confidentiality undertaking (e.g.,
a non-disclosure agreement).
Otherwise, it is unlikely that your
invention will satisfy the novelty
requirement at the time of filing
at the relevant patent office. In
essence, if your product is already
available in the market, it will not
be considered novel.
Once your IP is registered or
otherwise protected, there are
various options available for
commercialising your IP (i.e.,
getting your IP to market).
Licensing (exclusive and non-
exclusive) is the most common
commercialism mechanism used.
Other ways of commercialising
IP could be a joint venture
arrangement with another
established company, or a
start-up enterprise involving
venture capital.
Furthermore, accurate IP valuation
and protection is an important
part of an organisation’s asset
management strategy, providing
better negotiating positions and
increased avenues for income
generation. Conversely, failure
to pay proper attention to the
valuation and protection of an
organisation’s intangible assets
could have a detrimental effect
in various commercial scenarios,
such as mergers and acquisitions,
licence or franchise negotiations,
purchase and sale of IP assets
and financing/investment
opportunities.
With the unprecedented influx of
health and medical technologies,
obtaining IP protection for
computer programs and software
continues to be a challenging
business issue for innovators and
organisations alike. Below is a
summary of the key types of IP
protections that may be available
for computer program rights in
Asia Pacific:
In some jurisdictions, such
as Australia, computer
software is primarily
protected by copyright as a
“literary work,” although a
computer program may also
be patentable.
Trademark law, with its
system of registration, gives
significant protection for
brand names, logos, devices
and forms of trade dress
used in relation to software
products and packaging, but
is not a source of substantive
rights relating to the content
or function of software, or its
underlying code.
Software is potentially
patentable, although claims
for mathematical algorithms
alone are generally not.
Unauthorised copying
of software may also be
actionable under laws
governing misleading and
deceptive conduct, passing
off, trade secrets (see below)
and confidential information.
Software and computer programs
are unique as they can be protected
by both copyright and patent law
in most Asia Pacific jurisdictions.
Copyright in software protects
the unique expression in the
source code, while patents protect
new and non-obvious functions.
Patents are, on the whole, far
more valuable as they protect the
implementation of the source code
(i.e., the “function”), regardless of
how this is documented. As such,
anything that may compromise
another person’s (or company’s)
patent rights should be avoided, as
enforcement proceedings can be
costly, both financially and in terms
of reputation in the market.
Both globally and within Asia
Pacific, several approaches have
been adopted to protect software
by means of patents. While
many countries grant patents for
software, computer programs
are specifically excluded from
patentable subject matter in others
(including China, Indonesia, New
Zealand, Thailand, the Philippines
and Vietnam). However, in many
of these “excluding” countries, it
may be possible to obtain patent
protection for computer program-
related inventions.
In some jurisdictions,
mathematical algorithms
in themselves are
unpatentable, except for
computer software that
produces physical effects
(for example, an improved
method for drawing a curved
image in computer graphics;
see CCOM v Jiejing (1994) 28
IPR 481(the CCOM Case)).
Similarly, business methods
may be patented if they
produce an artificial state
of affairs, in the sense of a
concrete, tangible, physical
or observable effect.
The main controversy surrounding
computer program patents can be
summarised as follows:
It is often said that software
innovation involves
cumulative, sequential
development and re-use
of other people’s work,
particularly with respect to
open source software (see
below), which preserves
interoperability between
programs, systems
and networks. This
interoperability does not fit
within the patent framework,
which limits the range of
options available to new
software innovators.
Conversely, proponents
of software patents argue
that patent protection
is necessary in order to
encourage investment in this
field. This financial support
is vital to support innovation
in various technological
areas, including medical and
health technology.
Open Source Software (OSS) is
software that is licenced on very
liberal terms to allow licencees
more than just access to the
source code of the software. As
a general overview, OSS licences
allow for the following:
free re-distribution of
software by any party without
payment of a royalty or
licence fee
programs are distributed
with their source code
the licence will allow for
modifications to the source
code and derived works
these derived works can
then be distributed on the
same terms as the original
software licencee
Patent laws give patent owners
substantial, valuable control over
who uses their invention, and
extends to any form of use (i.e.,
patent infringement is generally a
strict liability offence). Conversely,
the basic premise of OSS is that
innovators should be able to view
and use the source code of the
computer program and modify it
for their own purposes without
obtaining the consent of the
licensor/owner.
Ensure Your Competitive Advantage by
Protecting Your Ideas
Overview of IP Protection Methods for
Computer Programs/Software
Protecting Software Technology
What is Open Source Software?
The Inherent Conflict Between
OSS and Patent Rights
Intellectual property issues
in healthtech

It is worth noting that under the Patent
Cooperation Treaty (PCT), it is possible
to seek patent protection simultaneously
in several countries by filing a single
“international” patent application.
A patent is a legally enforceable
proprietary right granted to
protect a device, substance,
method or process that is new,
inventive and useful. The owner
of a patent will have the exclusive
right to commercially exploit the
invention for the duration of the
patent, which is 20 years in most
Asia Pacific jurisdictions. The
key question for most innovators
and organisations is: When is an
invention patentable?
In general terms, for an invention
to be patentable, the following
conditions should apply:
It must be a patentable
subject matter (this is often
referred to as a “manner of
new manufacture”).
It must be novel and involve
an inventive step when
compared to the prior art
base that existed before the
“priority date” of the claim.
It must be useful.
It must not have been
secretly used by the patent
holder before the “priority
date” of the claim.
[Note: “Priority date” refers to the
filing date of the first application
for a patent registration. When the
patent is accepted by the relevant
government agency, the owner
will have protection, i.e., can claim
priority, from this filing date.
What Constitutes Patentable
Subject Matter?
The types of inventions (or subject
matter) that are capable of being
the subject of patent protections
vary in different countries. In
summary, the following subject
matter will be expressly precluded
from patent protection in certain
jurisdictions:
Methods of treatment of
the human or animal body
by surgery or therapy or of
diagnosis (all Asia Pacific
jurisdictions with very few
case exceptions)
Inventions that may
encourage offensive,
immoral or anti-social
behaviour (includes
Malaysia, Thailand,
Indonesia and Taiwan)
Discoveries, scientific
theories and mathematical
methods (includes China,
Indonesia, Malaysia, the
Philippines and Thailand)
Plant or animal varieties
or biological processes for
the production of plants
or animals (other than
man-made living micro-
organisms, micro-biological
processes and the products
of such micro-organism
processes) (including China,
Indonesia, Malaysia, New
Zealand, the Philippines,
Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam)
Schemes, rules or methods
for doing business (includes
China, Hong Kong, Indonesia,
Malaysia, South Korea and
Vietnam)
“Simple” Versus “Invention”
Patents
In several Asia Pacific jurisdictions,
inventions can also be protected
by “simple patents.” Depending
on the specific country, the name
may differ from “petty patents”
(e.g., Laos) to “utility models”
(e.g., China, the Philippines
and Cambodia). Simple patents
generally cover products and tools
and rarely extend to technologies.
This type of patent is very popular
with innovators as, generally
speaking, it provides a faster, more
affordable route for protection of
inventions. In some cases, there is
no requirement for an “inventive
step” (e.g., Indonesia, the
Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam),
or the degree of inventiveness
required may be less (e.g., China,
Malaysia and Laos). There is,
however, a reduced period of
protection, which is usually 7 to 10
years from the filing date.
Are Patents Valid in Every
Country?
Patents are territorial rights,
meaning the exclusive rights are
only available to the patent owner
in the country or jurisdiction in
which a patent has been filed and
granted. As such, it is imperative
that an application for patent
protection is applied in each of the
Asia Pacific countries in which the
technology is launched.
In Asia Pacific, only Cambodia
and Myanmar are not contracting
states of the PCT (as at July 2015).
Patent protection through the PCT
should be considered as a more
convenient, efficient and cost-
effective process.
Furthermore, Article 4 of the Paris
Convention for the Protection of
Industrial Property states that
once a patent application has been
filed in a convention country, it is
possible to claim the same priority
date for a subsequent application
made in another convention
country within 12 months. Current
Asia Pacific members include
Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan,
Cambodia, China, Indonesia,
Japan, Laos, Mongolia, New
Zealand, Papua New Guinea, the
Philippines, South Korea, Samoa,
Singapore, Thailand, Tonga and
Vietnam.
Patents

Copyright protects the original
expression of ideas, such as art,
literature, music, broadcasts and
computer programs (“works”),
but not the ideas themselves.
It protects original works from
unauthorised copying and gives the
owners exclusive rights to licence
their work. Copyright is free
and automatic in all Asia Pacific
jurisdictions and generally lasts for
50 to 70 years after the death of the
creator/owner.
To obtain this automatic protection,
a “work” must satisfy the following
general conditions:
expression in a particular
form
originality
independent creative effort
of the author (e.g., works
created by a computer,
although original, cannot be
copyrighted)
Copyright protection provides for
moral rights aimed at protecting
the author’s reputation (for
instance, the right of attribution of
authorship) and economic rights
that give authors the exclusive
right to commercialise their work
for economic gain. A copyright
holder’s economic rights will be
infringed where the following
apply:
another person or entity
exploits the copyrighted
work without the holder’s
permission
such exploitation is not
considered “fair use” or
under a statutory licence
It is also possible to register
copyright interests in some Asia
Pacific jurisdictions. Although
copyright registration is not
required for protection, it can
assist in proving ownership
in the context of enforcement
proceedings (particularly where
a government authority required
evidence of ownership before
accepting a case).
Copyright software is expressly
protected by copyright laws in the
ASEAN region, covering the source
code, object code and written
documentation. This will prevent
anyone from running, copying,
modifying or distributing the
software without the permission of
the rights holder. However, this will
not protect the ideas behind the
computer program.
Trade secrets are a subset of the
broader category of confidential
information that is protected by
the judiciary, spanning commercial
secrets, personal secrets,
artistic secrets and state secrets.
Generally speaking, trade secrets
will be any information having
commercial value to the holder,
which, if disclosed to a competitor,
would be liable to cause real (or
significant) harm to the holder of
the secret.
Although copyright law may
protect the particular form of
document in which the information
is embedded, and patent law may
protect the subject matter of the
information (provided it discloses
a patentable invention), there is no
legislation that specifically protects
secret information. As such, it
is generally accepted that trade
secrets are simply information
to which property rights do
not attach. It is imperative that
confidentiality agreements are
signed by individuals who are party
to the trade secret.
Trade Secrets
Copyright

Baker & McKenzie’s Asia Pacific Healthcare Group
has advised global pharmaceutical, life sciences and
medical devices companies for more than 50 years.
The Firm is the sole law firm ranked in Band 1 in the
Chambers Asia Pacific Life Sciences rankings for
three consecutive years (2014-2016). In Asia Pacific,
Baker & McKenzie’s healthcare practice has more than
150 lawyers, more than 20 of whom have healthcare
and medical-related qualifications, as well as a
number of non-lawyer medical practitioners who hold
doctorate degrees in fields such as biotechnology,
pharmacology, nursing and bioethics. Our team has a
thorough appreciation of the issues facing our clients,
from compliance pressures and complex pricing and
reimbursement difficulties, to red-flag issues such as
anti-corruption.
As a trusted advisor to the world’s largest life sciences
companies, the Baker & McKenzie Asia Pacific
Healthcare Group offers cutting-edge, value-added
services to help clients stay abreast of key industry
trends.
These products include the following:
Webinars
Client seminars
Publications such as From Pills to Tablets and
Investing in the Healthcare Industry
Mobile apps such as the MapApp, which won
the Innovative Use of Technology Award at the
FT Innovative Lawyers Asia Pacific Awards 2015
(download it on the App Store)
Thought leadership reports
Ben McLaughlin
Head, Asia Pacific Healthcare Group
ben.mclaughlin@bakermckenzie.com
About the Asia Pacific
Healthcare Group
Ben McLaughlin talks about
Baker & McKenzie’s strengths
and value-added client services

Contributors
Ben McLaughlin
Head, Asia Pacific Healthcare Group
Baker & McKenzie
Sydney
Tel: +61 2 8922 5342
Ben.McLaughlin@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Julien de Salaberry
Founder and CIO, The Propell Group
Singapore
Tel: +65 9488 7334
julien@propellgroup.biz
View CV
Yee Chung Seck
Partner, Baker & McKenzie
Ho Chi Minh City
Tel: +84 8 3520 2633
YeeChung.Seck@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Toby Patten
Special Counsel, Baker & McKenzie
Melbourne
Tel: +61 3 9617 4456
Toby.Patten@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Anne-Marie Allgrove
Sydney
Tel: +61 2 8922 5274
Anne-marie.Allgrove@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Andy Leck
Principal, Baker & McKenzie.Wong & Leow
Singapore
Tel: +65 6434 2525
Andy.Leck@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Ren Jun Lim
Local Principal, Baker & McKenzie.Wong & Leow
Singapore
Tel: +65 6434 2721
Ren.Jun.Lim@bakermckenzie.com
James Halliday
Sydney
Tel: +61 2 8922 5187
James.Halliday@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Elisabeth White
Sydney
Tel: +61 2 8922 5386
Elisabeth.White@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Chen Yih Pong
Principal, Baker & McKenzie.Wong & Leow
Singapore
Tel: +65 6434 2682
ChenYih.Pong@bakermckenzie.com
View CV
Monique Nicolle
Senior Associate, Baker & McKenzie
Sydney
Rebekah Lam
Associate, Baker & McKenzie
Sydney
Huiying Lin
Associate, Baker & McKenzie.Wong & Leow
Singapore
Grace Loukides
Graduate at Law, Baker & McKenzie
Melbourne
Le Thu Minh
Legal Assistant, Baker & McKenzie
Ho Chi Minh City
Rosaline Chow Koo
Founder and CEO, CXA Group
Singapore
Kae Yuan Tan
Co-founder and CEO, REKA Health
Singapore
Francois Cadiou
Co-founder and CEO, Healint
Singapore

Next Issue
Chapter
4
Disruption
in Healthcare

Our difference is the way we think,
work and behave — we combine
an instinctively global perspective
with a genuinely multicultural
approach, enabled by collaborative
relationships and yielding practical,
innovative advice. Serving our clients
with more than 4,200 lawyers in
more than 45 countries, we have a
deep understanding of the culture of
business the world over and are able
to bring the talent and experience
needed to navigate complexity across
practices and borders with ease.
© 2016 Baker & McKenzie. All rights reserved. Baker & McKenzie International is a
Swiss Verein with member law firms around the world. In accordance with the common
terminology used in professional service organizations, reference to a “partner” means
a person who is a partner, or equivalent, in such a law firm. Similarly, reference to an
“office” means an office of any such law firm.
This may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. Prior
results don’t guarantee a similar outcome.
www.bakermckenzie.com
Baker & McKenzie has been global since
inception. Being global is part of our DNA.

Powering the Future of Healthcare in Asia Pacific | Funding, IP Protection | Chapter 3 (incl. 1&2)

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (19)

Similaire à Powering the Future of Healthcare in Asia Pacific | Funding, IP Protection | Chapter 3 (incl. 1&2)

Similaire à Powering the Future of Healthcare in Asia Pacific | Funding, IP Protection | Chapter 3 (incl. 1&2) (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Powering the Future of Healthcare in Asia Pacific | Funding, IP Protection | Chapter 3 (incl. 1&2)