From Biosimilars to Cell & Gene Therapy: Career Lessons from Kodo Lifesciences’ Dr. Ravish Patel

Pharma Now: Today on PharmaNow, we have Dr. Ravish Patel, General Manager (Technical Operations) at Kodo Lifesciences. Welcome, Dr. Ravish. Our audience would really love to know about your journey. How did you come up to this point?

Dr. Ravish: I started my journey at Intas Biotech in 2007, and gradually I learned a lot of analytical techniques and biotechnologies in the field of biosimilars. I would say that I will no longer limit myself to being a bioassay expert; I now have the ability to handle many other aspects in the biotherapeutic segment.

Until 2024, I was with Sun Pharma, and then I shifted from biotherapeutics into cell and gene therapy. Although it is part of biotherapeutics, the dynamics are somewhat different. My journey, spanning from 2007 to date, is nearly 18 years in this field, and I have witnessed significant progress and considerable potential. I have learned multiple things and encountered various challenges, as well as how to tackle and handle them.

When I specifically discuss cell and gene therapy, which is my current domain, we are involved in plasmid DNA manufacturing, and our main focus is to support cell and gene therapy organisations. I have also been part of many international platforms and have had the opportunity to interact with key people in the cell and gene therapy segment. I realized that there are a lot of grey areas and a lot of regulatory aspects still evolving. It is not only about the grey areas but also about understanding what is right and what is the bare minimum that must be done from a regulatory perspective.

In brief, throughout this journey from its inception to the present, I have worked across various segments. At Cadila, I also had the opportunity to work on vaccines. I worked on rabies and HPV vaccines, and on some plasma-derived products, which was part of my journey when I was at Intas, which now also has a plasma-derived facility.

I have come across several things, and the message to the audience is that this field has huge potential. The challenging therapy segment is truly booming.

Pharma Now: So you've come across a lot of things over your 18 years. Looking back, what has been the most defining project or turning point in your career so far?

Dr. Ravish: The most defining turning point in my career was when I took an opportunity to tackle a few things while I was at Vitane Pharma. I took the opportunity to handle certain assignments, client projects that were not in India but in Iran. Iran has its own challenges, as they do not have open and friendly relations with the US, and there are many things they cannot easily access which other parts of the world can.

When we took up this opportunity and this project, during those days I saw that there were certain things we initially assumed we would be able to tackle. However, later, when we were actually in the real scenario, we realised that we had made a commitment to the client, but it would be very challenging. I took that as an opportunity and accepted the challenge very positively, with the correct mindset, and I overcame all those obstacles and bottlenecks. I believe I passed with flying colors.

So, I would not call it a turning point, but I would say it was something that shaped me into who I am today. It gave me confidence and strength, and taught me that things can move forward if you have the right mindset.

Pharma Now: Correct. Challenges really matter. Challenges shape us, but we must have the right mindset to tackle them.

Dr. Ravish: Moreover, I would say that if you have the ability to see things out of the box, it would not be that challenging. You simply need to adopt a different approach. How you apply that approach is what matters.

Pharma Now: Approaches matter, yes. Approaches come from experience. Approaches keep evolving. The way you used to approach things 10 or 18 years ago is very different from how you approach them today.

Dr. Ravish: Yes. And when you asked this question and used the key term “turning point,” it reminded me of something interesting, which is also a message to the audience. When we think about turning points—let me take yesterday’s example. I was traveling from the central station to the hotel, and a cab was booked. Unfortunately, the cab driver was not very skilled in driving, or for whatever reason, he hit two people on the road. It was late at night, and a heated argument was underway.

When you think outside the box, it becomes essential to understand how to handle such a situation. The situation arises unexpectedly, something beyond your control. Perhaps the driver was not skilled, perhaps it was due to traffic congestion, or perhaps the city's traffic regulations were not properly enforced. But how you handle the situation is what matters.

I spoke separately to the driver and told him that it was not about whose fault it was; he should learn how to handle situations like that. Situation handling definitely comes with experience. So I agree with you.

Pharma Now: I think people should move on. Even if there are challenges, you simply adapt, accept them, work on them, and move forward. You can’t keep discussing the challenges over and over again.

Dr. Ravish: I would say to the young audience, mainly when I was in Sun Pharma, I handled a few Gen Z team members, and even in my current organization I have Gen Z subordinates. They are like, “Sir, this won’t happen.” I never said this to my manager or my boss. So I have to have a lot of patience to handle them and make them understand that you cannot keep on complaining.

You have to understand that people have reached the moon, and here we are talking about things that are absolutely possible if we have the right mindset. You have to have a lot of patience. You must be prepared for whatever comes to your table. You have to listen to them. You cannot expect them to speak in a certain way. They are very upfront, very transparent, and very clear. I do not have any reservation or objection to the way they approach things. I certainly appreciate that they are very to the point and very clear about what they can do.

Because we, as millennials, were always saying to our managers, “Okay, we will do it,” with a kind of “yes, boss” attitude. We always said the boss is right. But this is no longer the case with Gen Z.

Pharma Now: When you think about your role today, what part excites you the most, the science, the operations, or the consumer impact?

Dr. Ravish: I would go with the consumer impact and the science. Definitely, science plays a significant role in determining the impact on the client. I would say that, being in this segment currently, when I am at Kodo Lifesciences, and Kodo is a client-oriented and service-provider organization, our collaboration with our future clients should be as transparent as possible. When it comes to data, we are a data-driven company, and we strive to be a quality-driven company. We want to be as transparent as possible with our future clients.

This can only be achieved through science. If you conduct proper science, if you put proper rationale behind your assays and activities, there is very little room for justification later, even in the worst-case scenario, if something fails. You have all rationales, all risk assessments, all the investigations in hand, and everything looks good.

I would like to add something I learned while working with Sun Pharma. I interacted with one of the key leaders, and during a very interactive session, we met in a meeting room where I presented data. As scientists, we tend to present only the positive results, the good data. This is a very natural and common occurrence; there is nothing wrong with it. However, that day, the leader, who held a key role, stated that it is not always necessary to present only the positive data. Sometimes, you can also display the bad data and failures. It builds more trust. Nothing is achieved without failure; every success is a part of the process of trial and error.

That really touched me, and I also believe that science is not always success. It is not always a simple tick-mark, 'done.' There are setbacks, bottlenecks, and obstacles, and you should be as transparent as possible: “Okay, it has failed. We are now planning the next experiments. This is how we have designed them, and we will come up with the expected results.” It is also possible that the next plan might fail. There is nothing wrong in that. This is how science works.

I would say that consumer impact and science are the two aspects I would select from this question.

Pharma Now: Okay. So let me emphasize that: success is a part of failure. Exactly. Failure can be part of success also. Exactly. So if you are transparent, if the company or the boardroom knows what the challenges are, they are more open to work on those challenges rather than just seeing the good data and moving away. And you cannot just put everything under the carpet.

Dr. Ravish: That philosophy I always took as good feedback, and from then onwards, whenever I present my work or my data in a forum, I always include the failures as well. It gives confidence to the audience that there are hiccups, and there are imperfections behind picture-perfect outcomes. These are things that also need to be looked into, and there is nothing wrong in presenting them.

That is what I learned, and I now give this message to the younger generation and to the audience listening to this conversation: there is nothing wrong in presenting failures. As kids, we sometimes hid our scores from our parents, wondering what they would say if we showed them our report card. I even remember one of my friends and neighbors who used to make fake signatures of his parents because of fear. There is nothing wrong in that fear—it is human.

As a manager and a leader, I also appreciate it when someone comes up with a new idea or approach after a failure. Failure is a part of work. It builds the steps of success. It is simply a step toward success.

PharmaNow: Yeah. So, even the company or the room should be open enough to give them that space, so they feel comfortable sharing it.

Dr. Ravish: Exactly. Exactly. The fear should first go. You have to be very friendly with them so that everything becomes as transparent as possible. In GMP there is a lot of transparency required. In R&D we are not that stringent about documentation, but when it comes to compliance—which is my current domain—stringency is required in terms of documentation, transparency, contemporaneous entries, and everything being as per GMP guidelines.

When we talk about all this big jargons, it all comes into place only when you and your subordinates or team members have very good bonding. That is how they will share something like, “I forgot this entry yesterday,” because of some reason. Then the question becomes: what is the solution? Everything has a solution. As a manager, I should not escalate or react aggressively, saying, “You forgot this.” These things happen sometimes, and then they learn eventually that next time they should be more cautious.

That is how we must build this relationship, and that is how we must nurture it.

Pharma Now: Very true. Okay, moving on to the next question. Translating R&D into scalable product is a tough challenge. So what’s the most common mistake you see companies make in this transition?

Dr. Ravish: What I understood from your question is translating R&D into scalable products. Okay. So I would say that when we talk about biosimilars, we have a lot of microheterogenicity. When we talk about biotherapeutics, it could be mAbs, or maybe cytokines, or maybe growth hormones. Each of these has its own unique challenges.

Particularly when we discuss biosimilars, they have their own innovator pathways, which include reference products, and everything has already been done by someone before we begin. So when we say it is just a copy-and-paste thing, in reality it is not. We have our own biological system, which is a cell line with its own unique characteristics.

At the R&D level, or even at a flask or lab scale, things appear very promising and everything seems fine. But this does not exactly translate at scale. At scale, it has its own challenges, and there might also be failures. That is what I wanted to highlight here.

Pharma Now: So while you do R&D, there might be situations where you come across something that makes you think, “This product has potential; it can work really well in the market or work really well for a patient.” So while doing R&D, do you find that companies—or manufacturing companies—actually make certain common mistakes? What is the most common mistake you see?

Dr. Ravish: Common mistakes—I would say that I cannot criticize somebody’s approach or somebody’s practices. But what I can conclude is that there are a few very clear guidelines. There are many guidance documents and events that are easily available on public platforms. And these might be aspects we overlook—perhaps due to our confidence in the system, our own skills, or our previous industry practices that people commonly follow.

I would say that this is something people should look into. These guidelines give you a great deal of confidence and are helpful if you are doing something wrong, so that you can avoid setbacks or failures later. There are not many strict guidelines, but there are guidelines that are very strict and people have to stick to them. There is no alternative.

However, at the R&D level, there are documents that provide excellent ideas. For example, there are some instances where we may not have a lack of understanding, but rather a lack of experience, or perhaps we are confident that a certain step is acceptable because we have done it in a previous assignment. But you never know—there may be another chapter or revision published that you have not touched upon, and then you might face setbacks.

Later, when you submit your dossier or documents to the regulatory bodies, you may receive queries to relook into certain aspects, and that simply wastes time and delays your overall timeline. It is better to address all this beforehand so that the timeline and everything else is not sacrificed.

PharmaNow: What’s the hardest part of taking a new nutraceutical from idea to market?

Dr. Ravish: I would prefer to pass this question because nutraceuticals are not an area I have worked in or have exposure to. So I would not be the right person to comment on this. We can skip this one.

PharmaNow: Fair enough. So let me ask you this—do you think India has the right ecosystem, talent, regulations, and consumer trust to lead this industry?

Dr. Ravish: This is a very good question, and something I’ve spoken about in various forums in India because it is a key challenge—especially when we look at talent, ecosystem readiness, and industry expectations.

To be very honest, I don’t see any gap in India’s scientific talent. Our talent pool is in line with global standards. I’ve attended many international conferences, and I can say with 100% confidence that India has exceptional scientific capability.

Where I see a major gap is in industry–academia collaboration. In India, academia and industry largely operate in silos—academics work on one set of priorities, while industry operates in a completely different zone. They rarely work hand-in-hand, and that disconnect becomes a bottleneck for innovation.

If you look at Europe, the US, or several Asian countries, you will find very strong and structured collaborations between universities and industry partners. They work closely on projects, funding models, technology development, and shared research goals. That synergy accelerates innovation.

The good thing is that India is slowly moving in that direction. The government is also encouraging stronger partnerships between industry and academia, and supporting collaborative initiatives. Once we bridge this gap effectively, I am confident that India will soon be in a position to bring innovative molecules to the global stage. The potential is definitely there.

PharmaNow: So talent is at par, but the collaboration is lacking—that’s very true. People in academia primarily learn theoretical knowledge, whereas industry professionals are already experimenting and innovating. Ideally, experimentation should start at the academic level.

How do you effectively integrate science and consumer demand? Earlier, you mentioned both science and consumer impact. How do you bring these two together?

Dr. Ravish: First of all, being in this segment, we must clearly understand what the consumer expects and what the market needs. Only then can we translate strong science into solutions that truly matter.

For me, integration begins with listening—understanding the unmet needs, expectations, and real challenges faced by patients, healthcare professionals, or users. Once we have that clarity, we can bring our best scientific knowledge to the table.

This involves designing the right experiments, establishing a strong scientific rationale, and employing robust research methodologies while keeping the end-user in mind.

Ultimately, it’s about aligning scientific rigor with consumer relevance. When you understand both sides well, you can deliver products that are scientifically sound and genuinely impactful for the people who need them.

Rapid Fire Round

PharmaNow: Okay, let’s end with a quick rapid-fire round. Just one-word or short answers.

1) Your favorite moment in your career so far?

Dr. Ravish: My favorite moment was when I received the opportunity at INTAS to pursue my doctorate under the “earn and learn” policy while continuing my job. That was truly a milestone for me.

2) Coffee or chai during long research hours?

Dr. Ravish: Coffee.

3) Are you a morning person or a night owl?

Dr. Ravish: I’m naturally a morning person—an early morning guy. But these days, work schedules often make me a night owl. I barely sleep two to three hours sometimes, but this phase won’t last long.

4) A book or podcast you’d recommend to young professionals?

Dr. Ravish: I would recommend a podcast. That’s the trend now—I see so many people at airports and stations plugged into podcasts. Books are still common in Europe and the US, even among Gen Z, but in India podcasts are leading, so I’d suggest that.

5) If not in pharma, which career would you have chosen?

Dr. Ravish: Hospitality—maybe event management. It’s a passion. I still enjoy organizing events.

I remember when I was working at Vitane in Hyderabad, it was a startup and we didn’t have an HR or admin team. For our first Dussehra and Diwali celebration, I took the initiative to plan the entire event, including the Rangoli competition, traditional attire contests, and everything else.

My director told me, “The floor is yours—just tell me the budget.”

That event turned out to be one of the best we've ever had. Even today, colleagues from that time still remind me about it. So yes, I’d have definitely chosen hospitality or event management.

PharmaNow: Thank you so much, Dr. Ravish, for sharing such valuable insights with our audience. PharmaNow is truly grateful to have you with us.

Dr. Ravish: Thank you so much.