編者按：在充滿挑戰(zhàn)且快速發(fā)展的神經(jīng)科學(xué)領(lǐng)域，鮮有領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者能像Stacie Weninger博士這般在塑造行業(yè)格局方面發(fā)揮關(guān)鍵作用。作為F-Prime生物醫(yī)學(xué)研究倡議（FBRI）主席兼F-Prime風(fēng)險(xiǎn)合伙人，她活躍于基礎(chǔ)科學(xué)與企業(yè)創(chuàng)建的交匯點(diǎn)：發(fā)掘顛覆性研究成果，并組建頂尖團(tuán)隊(duì)將其轉(zhuǎn)化為創(chuàng)新藥物。憑借聯(lián)合創(chuàng)立Denali Therapeutics和Neumora等行業(yè)中堅(jiān)企業(yè)的經(jīng)歷，以及近期聯(lián)合主導(dǎo)Tenvie Therapeutics完成2億美元融資的成果，Weninger博士逐步形成了清晰的成功法則：降低創(chuàng)新靶點(diǎn)研發(fā)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，深耕小分子藥物的持久潛力，并將臨床試驗(yàn)重心重新聚焦于生物標(biāo)志物與真實(shí)世界數(shù)據(jù)。近日，我們與Weninger博士展開對話，深入探討她構(gòu)建新一代神經(jīng)科學(xué)企業(yè)的策略，以及開創(chuàng)腦部重大疾病治療新紀(jì)元的愿景。

Stacie Weninger博士現(xiàn)任F-Prime生物醫(yī)學(xué)研究倡議主席及F-Prime風(fēng)險(xiǎn)合伙人。她擁有深厚的神經(jīng)科學(xué)背景，職業(yè)生涯橫跨學(xué)術(shù)研究、風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資與科研管理等多個(gè)領(lǐng)域。作為神經(jīng)退行性疾病與精神疾病領(lǐng)域創(chuàng)新療法研發(fā)的重要推動者，她還擔(dān)任Target ALS等疾病基金會的董事會成員，持續(xù)支持生物醫(yī)學(xué)界的研究協(xié)作。

感謝您接受我們的采訪。我們想首先從您近期的工作談起，特別是您共同主導(dǎo)Tenvie Therapeutics完成的2億美元融資。在您看來，這個(gè)項(xiàng)目最突出的亮點(diǎn)是什么？它又體現(xiàn)了您在評估神經(jīng)科學(xué)領(lǐng)域企業(yè)時(shí)關(guān)注的哪些關(guān)鍵特質(zhì)？

Stacie Weninger博士：對我而言，成功始終來源于科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)與團(tuán)隊(duì)能力的有機(jī)結(jié)合。此前我曾共同領(lǐng)導(dǎo)創(chuàng)立Denali公司，其中令人振奮之處在于其廣闊的發(fā)展前景：新技術(shù)不斷涌現(xiàn)，我們對疾病生物學(xué)機(jī)制的理解也在持續(xù)加深。當(dāng)Denali決定重點(diǎn)發(fā)展其突破性的血腦屏障穿越技術(shù)平臺時(shí)，公司還擁有極具潛力的小分子藥物研發(fā)項(xiàng)目。我們認(rèn)為這些項(xiàng)目更適合通過私募融資獨(dú)立發(fā)展，于是我們組建了一支頂尖團(tuán)隊(duì)將其獨(dú)立孵化出來，使它們獲得足夠的資源與專注度。這樣就形成了理想的組合：卓越的團(tuán)隊(duì)搭配極具前景的基礎(chǔ)研發(fā)項(xiàng)目。

當(dāng)前神經(jīng)科學(xué)領(lǐng)域正迎來蓬勃發(fā)展的階段，創(chuàng)新治療模式不斷涌現(xiàn)。然而從長遠(yuǎn)來看，小分子藥物仍將是理想治療方案之一。一旦我們能夠成功降低靶點(diǎn)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，并證實(shí)調(diào)控靶點(diǎn)能改變疾病進(jìn)程，那么最終目標(biāo)便是研發(fā)出具有同等療效的口服藥物。

您清晰闡述了重新聚焦小分子藥物的重要性，但同時(shí)您也提及了對新型治療模式的高度關(guān)注。在腦衰老治療領(lǐng)域，您認(rèn)為還有哪些治療策略最具潛力？

Stacie Weninger博士：穿越血腦屏障的遞送技術(shù)正展現(xiàn)出強(qiáng)大潛力。最初我們主要考慮如何遞送那些無法輕易穿越血腦屏障的抗體藥物，但現(xiàn)在我們意識到其應(yīng)用遠(yuǎn)不止于此，比如寡核苷酸和酶等大分子都能通過該技術(shù)遞送。Denali公司通過遞送患者缺失的蛋白酶來治療亨特綜合征（Hunter syndrome）的數(shù)據(jù)就十分令人振奮。此外，通過RNAi等技術(shù)來調(diào)控基因表達(dá)也展現(xiàn)出巨大前景。隨著這些技術(shù)在中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)直接給藥模式下不斷獲得概念驗(yàn)證，若未來能與其他遞送技術(shù)結(jié)合，實(shí)現(xiàn)外周給藥即可作用于大腦，將會是極具突破性的進(jìn)展。

圖片來源：123RF

如果我們聚焦于阿爾茨海默病這一富有挑戰(zhàn)性的領(lǐng)域，您認(rèn)為過去十年中最具影響力的進(jìn)展是什么？未來投資的重大機(jī)遇又在哪里？

Stacie Weninger博士：首先，如果靶點(diǎn)本身不正確，就無法開發(fā)有效的藥物。因此，推進(jìn)我們對這類復(fù)雜、多因素疾病的生物學(xué)理解至關(guān)重要。同時(shí)，我認(rèn)為研究影響疾病進(jìn)展速度的基因?qū)碜兏镄杂绊憽?/strong>迄今為止，大多數(shù)遺傳學(xué)研究都聚焦于疾病風(fēng)險(xiǎn)因素，但對于已出現(xiàn)癥狀的患者而言，影響疾病進(jìn)展速度的生物通路和基因或許才是更可行的治療靶點(diǎn)。這方面我們才剛剛開始。

生物標(biāo)志物同樣正在重塑藥物研發(fā)，其重要性怎么強(qiáng)調(diào)都不為過。基于在醫(yī)生診所進(jìn)行的認(rèn)知測試來評估藥效的策略面對噪音大，難度高的挑戰(zhàn)。諸多因素都會影響測試結(jié)果，比如睡眠質(zhì)量、通勤壓力等等。我們需要建立針對疾病亞型和進(jìn)展程度的客觀、量化生物標(biāo)志物體系。這一點(diǎn)至關(guān)重要，因?yàn)榘柎暮Ｄ〈嬖陲@著異質(zhì)性：某些患者可能主要表現(xiàn)為免疫介導(dǎo)的病理特征，而另一些患者則存在溶酶體系統(tǒng)功能障礙。運(yùn)用生物標(biāo)志物精準(zhǔn)篩選試驗(yàn)對象并量化治療效果，將真正改變研發(fā)格局。

您特別強(qiáng)調(diào)了生物標(biāo)志物的重要性，尤其是多重檢測組合這一發(fā)展趨勢。在開發(fā)這類復(fù)雜診斷工具的過程中，在科研以及患者可及性層面，我們面臨哪些關(guān)鍵挑戰(zhàn)？

Stacie Weninger博士：我認(rèn)為多重生物標(biāo)志物檢測組合是未來發(fā)展趨勢。單一標(biāo)志物遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠，我們需要的是能夠一次性檢測數(shù)十種不同標(biāo)志物的血液檢測方案。鑒于共存病理是普遍現(xiàn)象，我們真正需要的是能檢測與神經(jīng)退行性病變相關(guān)的關(guān)鍵蛋白及多種生物系統(tǒng)的廣譜檢測組合，而非單一的"阿爾茨海默病檢測"或"帕金森病檢測"。

至于可及性，我并不擔(dān)憂這項(xiàng)技術(shù)。當(dāng)我們依賴PET和MRI掃描這類昂貴影像學(xué)檢查手段時(shí)，我確實(shí)曾為可及性問題憂慮。然而，我毫不懷疑我們將獲得具有可及性的血液生物標(biāo)志物檢測組合。

圖片來源：123RF

您關(guān)注的另一個(gè)關(guān)鍵挑戰(zhàn)是臨床試驗(yàn)本身。我們應(yīng)如何重新設(shè)計(jì)神經(jīng)病學(xué)試驗(yàn)，使其能更真實(shí)地反映患者的日常生活狀態(tài)？

Stacie Weninger博士：在醫(yī)生診所里進(jìn)行的低頻認(rèn)知評估很難反映疾病的真實(shí)波動。我在照顧患有神經(jīng)退行性疾病的父母期間，深切體會到患者病情每天的波動有多么劇烈，更不用說頻繁就診帶來的負(fù)擔(dān)。我們需要轉(zhuǎn)向使用可穿戴設(shè)備等技術(shù)采集的持續(xù)真實(shí)世界數(shù)據(jù)，并結(jié)合客觀生物標(biāo)志物，作為臨床試驗(yàn)終點(diǎn)。

能持續(xù)監(jiān)測患者活動的無創(chuàng)可穿戴設(shè)備可能會非常有效，尤其是對于帕金森病等需要監(jiān)測運(yùn)動功能的疾病。相比醫(yī)生診所里三分鐘的評估，全天24小時(shí)監(jiān)測用藥期與停藥期的活動數(shù)據(jù)能提供更全面的信息。我們確實(shí)需要更積極地采納這些創(chuàng)新工具。

圖片來源：123RF

現(xiàn)在，讓我們將視角轉(zhuǎn)向企業(yè)構(gòu)建與商業(yè)策略。考慮到神經(jīng)科學(xué)領(lǐng)域研發(fā)周期長、成本高的特點(diǎn)，您認(rèn)為哪些融資與合作模式最為有效？

Stacie Weninger博士：對小型生物技術(shù)公司而言，獨(dú)立將神經(jīng)退行性疾病療法推進(jìn)至3期臨床試驗(yàn)非常困難，因此需要多元化的融資與合作模式。從早期階段的私募資金，到公開市場投資者，當(dāng)然還包括大型藥企的合作，需要與各方建立合作關(guān)系。我們始終需要依靠大型藥企來開展大規(guī)模3期試驗(yàn)。

慈善資金在降低早期風(fēng)險(xiǎn)方面也發(fā)揮著重要作用。神經(jīng)科學(xué)研究難度高，往往需要漫長周期才能達(dá)到關(guān)鍵價(jià)值拐點(diǎn)。來自家族辦公室或大型公益慈善機(jī)構(gòu)的額外資金，不僅能幫助降低早期項(xiàng)目風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，還能增強(qiáng)其他投資者的信心。關(guān)鍵在于組建能夠推動項(xiàng)目進(jìn)展的頂尖團(tuán)隊(duì)，而慈善資金能夠激勵這些頂尖團(tuán)隊(duì)挑戰(zhàn)高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)靶點(diǎn)，而一旦成功，這些靶點(diǎn)或?qū)碜兏镄酝黄啤?/p>

回顧這一領(lǐng)域的發(fā)展，自《時(shí)代》周刊著名的阿爾茨海默病封面報(bào)道問世已過去25年。回顧往昔，您認(rèn)為我們在哪些方面尚未達(dá)到預(yù)期？展望未來，神經(jīng)退行性疾病與精神疾病領(lǐng)域有哪些進(jìn)展最令您振奮？

Stacie Weninger博士：展望未來，讓我振奮的是我們對神經(jīng)退行性疾病靶點(diǎn)的生物學(xué)理解不斷深化，尤其是外周免疫系統(tǒng)在大腦中的作用，這一方向長期以來被嚴(yán)重低估。在精神病學(xué)領(lǐng)域，令我欣喜的是我們正在超越過去"重錘式"的用藥方式。如今我們正逐步厘清關(guān)鍵受體的作用，進(jìn)而設(shè)計(jì)出在保持療效的同時(shí)大幅降低副作用的治療方案。

回望過去，我希望我們當(dāng)時(shí)能夠更快一些。然而，那時(shí)我們?nèi)狈θ缃裾莆盏闹T多技術(shù)手段。以有些早期阿爾茨海默病臨床試驗(yàn)為例，我們甚至無法準(zhǔn)確診斷患者，部分試驗(yàn)招募了大腦中不存在淀粉樣蛋白沉積的受試者，因?yàn)楫?dāng)時(shí)缺乏可靠的檢測手段。PET掃描技術(shù)和現(xiàn)今的血液檢測改變了這一格局。通過生物標(biāo)志物更早篩選受試者并縮短驗(yàn)證藥物療效的臨床試驗(yàn)時(shí)間，我們能夠全面加速研發(fā)進(jìn)程。

圖片來源：123RF

從個(gè)人經(jīng)歷來看，您曾與家人共同面對這些疾病?；谶@樣的體驗(yàn)，您認(rèn)為我們應(yīng)當(dāng)如何思考工作的最終目標(biāo)？是延長壽命，還是致力于縮短壽命與健康壽命之間的差距？

Stacie Weninger博士：這是一個(gè)讓我深有感觸的話題。今年一月，我的父親因帕金森病相關(guān)癡呆離世，目前我也在照料患有額顳葉癡呆的母親。有時(shí)，人們會將延長癡呆癥患者壽命幾個(gè)月與腫瘤學(xué)領(lǐng)域的生存期延長相比較，但我認(rèn)為二者之間存在巨大差異。正如你提到健康壽命與自然壽命之間的區(qū)別，我們的目標(biāo)應(yīng)該是延長健康壽命。當(dāng)患者處于癡呆癥晚期時(shí)，在我看來，重點(diǎn)并不是延長壽命本身。

我希望我們能在預(yù)防和早期干預(yù)領(lǐng)域投入更多努力。這意味著我們需要更早開始治療，往往在癥狀顯現(xiàn)之前就采取行動。如果能將神經(jīng)退行性疾病癥狀的出現(xiàn)推遲五到十年，那么即便對患者最終壽命影響有限，也足以顯著改善他們的健康壽命。對我來說，讓患者在認(rèn)知功能完好、能夠獨(dú)立生活的狀態(tài)下度過更多時(shí)間，才應(yīng)該是我們的目標(biāo)。

De-Risking the Brain: A Conversation with Dr. Stacie Weninger, President of the F-Prime Biomedical Research Initiative

Editor’s Note:In the high-stakes, rapidly advancing field of neuroscience, few leaders have been as instrumental in shaping the landscape as Dr. Stacie Weninger. As President of the F-Prime Biomedical Research Initiative (FBRI) and a Venture Partner at F-Prime, she operates at the nexus of foundational science and company creation, identifying transformative research and building world-class teams to translate it into new medicines. With a track record that includes co-founding industry pillars like Denali Therapeutics and Neumora, and recently co-leading a $200 million financing for Tenvie Therapeutics, Dr. Weninger has developed a clear thesis for success: de-risk novel targets, double down on the enduring power of small molecules, and re-focus clinical trials on biomarkers and real-world data. We spoke with Dr. Weninger to understand her strategy for building the next generation of neuroscience companies, and her vision for ushering in a new era of therapies for devastating brain disorders.

Stacie, thank you for speaking with us. We'd like to start with your recent work, beginning with a $200 million round for Tenvie Therapeutics that you co-led. What made that specific opportunity stand out, and what does it say about the key characteristics you look for in neuro-focused companies?

Stacie Weninger:To me, it’s always a combination of science and team.Previously, I co-led the founding of Denali, and part of the excitement there was the broad scope: new technologies were emerging and our understanding of the biology was improving. While Denali decided to double down on its exciting blood-brain barrier platform, it also had a promising program of small molecules. We decided those programs would be better financed privately, so we spun them out with a stellar team to give them the attention they deserved. That created the ideal combination: a phenomenal team and exciting foundational programs.

There's a lot of excitement in neuroscience right now as new modalities emerge. For instance, I was just listening to the latest Huntington's disease data from uniQure, which involves an MRI-guided neurosurgical administration of gene therapy. While that kind of therapy is a heavy lift and challenging to scale, it's an incredible proof of concept showing we can affect these diseases.Ultimately, however, small molecules are going to be among the best drugs.Once we de-risk targets and show that modulating them affects the disease, the ultimate goal will be a pill that can do the same.

You've made a strong case for refocusing on small molecules. At the same time, you mentioned the excitement around new modalities. What other therapeutic approaches for brain aging do you find most promising?

Stacie Weninger:Blood-brain barrier technology is proving to be quite powerful.The original idea was to deliver antibodies that can’t otherwise easily cross into the brain. We've since realized there's so much more we can deliver, such as oligos and enzymes. The data Denali has shown on delivering the missing enzyme to treat Hunter syndrome is very exciting. In addition,the ability to manipulate gene expression through technologies such as RNAi holds great promise.As these technologies achieve further POC with direct CNS administration, it will be exciting if we could further combine technologies to allow peripheral administration.

圖片來源：123RF

If we could zoom in on a specific and challenging area like Alzheimer's, what do you see as the most impactful advances over the past decade, and where are the next big opportunities for investment?

Stacie Weninger:First,if we don't have the right targets, we can’t make the right drugs.The advancements in our biological understanding of these complex, multifactorial disorders have been key.I also think examining genes that affect the rate of disease progression will be transformational.To date, most genetic research has focused on what increases disease risk. But the biological pathways and genes that affect rate of progression might be more tractable as therapeutic targets for patients who are already symptomatic. We've barely scratched the surface there.

Biomarkers are also completely changing drug development. I can't stress their importance enough.Trying to measure a drug's efficacy based on a cognitive test in a doctor's office is extremely noisy and difficult. Many factors influence the result, like how well you slept or how stressful traffic was getting there.We need objective, quantitative biomarkers of disease subtypes and disease progression. This is crucial because Alzheimer's isn’t the same across all patients;for example some may have a more immune-mediated disease while others have issues with their endolysosomal system.Using biomarkers to identify the right patients for a trial and measure the therapeutic effect will be truly game-changing.

You've highlighted the power of biomarkers, particularly the move towards multiplexed panels. As we develop these complex diagnostics, what are the key challenges, both in terms of the science and in ensuring they remain affordable for patients?

Stacie Weninger:I think the future is multiplexed panels of biomarkers.It’s not going to be one single marker; you're going to want a blood test that can measure dozens of different markers at once. As co-pathologies are the norm, not the exception, we really need broad neurodegeneration panels that examine key proteins and various biological systems, not just an "Alzheimer's panel" or a "Parkinson's panel".

As for affordability, I’m not worried about that with this technology. I was worried about how to keep things affordable when we were relying on PET scans and MRI scans, which are very expensive. But I have no doubt that we will have affordable blood biomarker panels.

圖片來源：123RF

Another hurdle you’ve focused on is the clinical trial itself. How can we redesign neurology trials to better reflect the day-to-day reality of living with a disease?

Stacie Weninger:Infrequent cognitive tests in a doctor's office aren't particularly meaningful.Having cared for both my parents with neurodegenerative diseases, I've seen how massive the daily fluctuations are, not to mention the burden of care appointments.We need to move toward using continuous, real-world data from technologies such as wearables, combined with objective biomarkers, as our endpoints.

Noninvasive wearables that continuously measure activity could be very effective, particularly for diseases like Parkinson’s where you want to monitor motor function. Measuring activity 24 hours a day, on meds, off meds, etc., is much better than a three-minute assessment in a doctor’s office. We really need to embrace these tools.

圖片來源：123RF

Shifting to the business side, let’s discuss the strategy behind building these companies. Given the notoriously long and expensive timelines in neuroscience, what financing and partnership models do you see working best?

Stacie Weninger:It's difficult for small biotech companies to take a therapy all the way through a Phase III trial in a neurodegenerative disease, so it requires a combination of models.You need a partnership among everyone, from private investment in early-stage work to public investors and, of course, big pharma. We will always rely on big pharma for large Phase III trials.

Philanthropy also plays a big role in early-stage de-risking.Neuroscience is hard, and it can be a long time before you reach those high-value inflection milestones. Additional financing, whether from family offices or large public charities, helps de-risk projects in the early stages and convinces other investors this is worth investing in. It’s about assembling an A-plus team that can move the needle, and philanthropic funding can encourage these A-plus teams to work on higher-risk targets that could be transformative if they succeed.

Looking at the state of the field, it’s been 25 years since that famous Time Magazine cover on Alzheimer's. When you look back at that time, where do you feel we have fallen short? And when you look forward, what developments in neurodegeneration and psychiatry get you most excited?

Stacie Weninger:When I look forward, I'm excited by our improved biological understanding of targets in neurodegeneration, especially the role of the peripheral immune system in the brain,which has been woefully underappreciated. In psychiatry, I’m excited that we’re moving beyond the "sledgehammer" drugs of the past. We're now understanding the specific receptors that matter, so we can design therapies that maintain efficacy with far fewer side effects.

When I look back, I wish we had been faster. However, we were lacking so many tools that we have now. In some of the early Alzheimer's trials, for example, we couldn't even definitively diagnose someone; some trials enrolled people who didn’t have amyloid in their brains because we didn't have the tools to detect it. PET scans, and now blood tests, have changed that.Using biomarkers to enroll people earlier and run shorter trials to see if a drug is working will accelerate everything.

圖片來源：123RF

On a more personal note, you’ve spoken about your family’s experience with these diseases. From that perspective, how should we think about the ultimate goal of our work? Is it about extending lifespan or closing the gap between lifespan and healthspan?

Stacie Weninger:This is very personal to me. I lost my dad in January to Parkinson's Disease Dementia, and I care for my mother, who has Frontotemporal Dementia. People sometimes compare extending life by a few months in dementia to doing so in oncology, and I think there's a huge difference.To your point on healthspan versus lifespan, we want to extend healthy life. When someone is in the late stages of dementia, to me, it is not about extending life.

I want to see us doing more prevention and early-stage slowing. That means we need to be treating people earlier, often before symptoms appear.If we could delay the onset of neurodegenerative disease symptoms by five or ten years, it would significantly change an individual’s healthspan, even if it doesn't dramatically alter their lifespan.To me, giving people more years of being cognitively intact and living independently should be our goal.

參考資料：

[1] A Trailblazer in Neuroscience and Biotech Leadership. Retrieved JNovember 4, 2025, from https://www.targetals.org/2025/03/28/a-trailblazer-in-neuroscience-and-biotech-leadership/

免責(zé)聲明：本文僅作信息交流之目的，文中觀點(diǎn)不代表藥明康德立場，亦不代表藥明康德支持或反對文中觀點(diǎn)。本文也不是治療方案推薦。如需獲得治療方案指導(dǎo)，請前往正規(guī)醫(yī)院就診。

版權(quán)說明：歡迎個(gè)人轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)至朋友圈，謝絕媒體或機(jī)構(gòu)未經(jīng)授權(quán)以任何形式轉(zhuǎn)載至其他平臺。轉(zhuǎn)載授權(quán)請?jiān)凇杆幟骺档隆刮⑿殴娞柣貜?fù)“轉(zhuǎn)載”，獲取轉(zhuǎn)載須知。