Q&A with Kristin Sherman: Life sciences veteran is fighting for women’s health

Kristin Sherman has worked in nearly every part of Indiana’s health care and life sciences world, from drugmaker Eli Lilly and Co. to a huge medical device company to numerous biotech startups to the top of Community Health Network as board chair.

Her 37-year career has given her a wide perspective on Indiana’s competitiveness in this critical sector of the economy, which employs tens of thousands of people and provides services to millions across the Hoosier state.

She is now trying to lead startup Kovina Therapeutics, which is still in the early stages of developing ways to stop human papillomavirus infections before cancer develops and to treat HPV cancers after detection.

Sherman spends her days trying to raise money and lead a team of part-time researchers and business leaders to push her company’s products into human testing. She spoke with IBJ about that challenge and about taking risks. The interview is edited for length and clarity.

Can you just bring me up to date on Kovina Therapeutics? How far along are you in raising money and developing research?

We were formed in 2020, although I did not join until 2021, at which point we raised a seed round of $2.05 million. Then we’ve been fortunate that we received three different [National Institutes of Health] grants in 2022, which was great timing given that the markets had been obviously very challenging during that time.

What was the total of those grants?

About $3.1 million. So we’ve generated a little over $5 million.

So you’re still pretty early-stage.

We are, yes. We are basically developing small molecules to treat both cancers and pre-malignant infections that are caused by human papillomavirus infections.

Who’s doing scientific research?

The science is co-owned between Kovina and Indiana University. Our chief scientific officer is Dr. Elliot Androphy, and his lab is doing a lot of the early research and work for us through agreements with Indiana University.

But he’s not a full-time employee, correct?

Correct. We run a typical biotech model, which includes bits and pieces of very experienced individuals. He’s our part-time chief scientific officer, and he is still associated with Indiana University, as well.

Can you tell me how you came to be CEO of this startup? This wasn’t your science, not your idea. Were you recruited?

Yes. I had worked as the chief financial officer for two prior companies based on science out of Indiana University. I received a call from someone I had worked with previously in those companies who said: “We’ve got some interesting science with broad applicability for women’s health.” And would I be interested?

So obviously, you saw something promising with both the science and the market.

Yes, as well as the women’s health potential focus. HPV disproportionately affects women through cervical pre-malignant infections and cervical cancer. And we don’t have great treatment options, especially for the pre-malignant infections. In fact, we don’t have a therapeutic treatment option. We have a surgical intervention to remove the infected tissue. So the opportunity to work on a therapeutic treatment for HPV and obviously the impact it could have on women’s health was very interesting to me.

So what’s your biggest job right now? Are you busy raising money or recruiting talent?

Always—said every biotech executive ever—it’s always about raising money. Even when you close a round, you’re focused on raising your next round of money. The science is continuing to progress, but it takes money, and for us, raising capital, especially in the Midwest, can be challenging. So I am always working on building those relationships that can lead to financing.

You’ve seen almost every side of the life sciences sector, from almost every vantage point. I would think you would have all those relationships right now and the track record that would have investors running to you.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case. You’re always trying to find the right fit between an investor, a market and the science. It’s really trying to line up a lot of different interests. So while you can reach out and they’ll take the call and you’ll have the opportunity to pitch the science, you might be too early, or they’re not interested in your market, or they already have a competing investment, or they’re not interested in the science. So it’s a matter of working through a very long list to try to find just the right fit.

Do you see another series of funding in the near future?

So that is the plan. That is what we are working on. But there’s always the opportunity to do partnerships, as well. So you always want to keep all options open in terms of financing rounds or partnering opportunities. Is there someone out there that has a skill set that would match with ours, that could license and jointly develop intellectual property? I am always evaluating the best path forward to get treatments as quickly as possible to patients.

Can we go back to your typical biotech model? Can you elaborate on that? It sounds like, especially for a very young company, it uses a lot of part-time labor, a lot of experienced part-time people.

Yes, that’s the model I’m familiar with that’s been successful. It’s kind of the bits-and-pieces model. So it’s a collection of very experienced individuals. They often have big pharma experience on their resume and in their background, but they’ve made the leap into biotech and also understand how to work in a smaller environment with limited resources. And that allows us to stay very nimble, very small, and also to just fund the work that needs to be done, not carry a very large overhead burden, which wouldn’t be appropriate for a small startup.

So you left Eli Lilly and Co. about 30 years ago?

Yes, and people thought I was crazy. My husband and I were both with Lilly. We both left to go with Guidant [Lilly’s medical-device spinoff].

But Guidant was a very successful spinoff, wasn’t it? I recall it became a target in a bidding war between Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson. Guidant decided to go with Boston Scientific for $27 billion in 2006.

Yes, J&J backed out of the process, and ultimately it was Boston Scientific that acquired the company.

Was that a big moment for you, selling a company for that amount of money?

Well, as you can imagine, there was a very large team involved in that. My role was as treasurer, so it was exciting to move a lot of money through the banking system on closing day. But with a transaction of that magnitude, there’s a very large team involved.

Has central Indiana finally put its mark on the map as a major center of biotech and health care? If not, what gaps do we still have?

I think our biggest challenge that we talk about a lot is raising capital and access to capital. It’s not uncommon for the Midwest, but I think we are especially challenged here in central Indiana. It just means that those of us in the startup ecosystem have to travel to find our capital and network. We don’t have as many opportunities here in the state that you might have if you were in Boston or out on the coast.

It looks like you’ve had plenty of career opportunities. Did they all land softly in your lap, or did you have to work hard for them?

You know, I have been very fortunate in that folks have taken risks on me, and I’ve been willing to take a leap of faith. After we sold Guidant, I received a phone call about a biotech CFO opportunity. And I still recall laughing when I got the phone call and saying, “I don’t know the first thing about being a biotech CFO.” … But the person who made the phone call took a risk, and I said, “OK, we’ll figure it out.” And that led to a wonderful, challenging career in biotech with small private companies. So for me, it’s been taking risks at each point and then being grateful for the individuals who made the call and gave me the opportunity.•

—John Russell