When NanoString Technologies—a pioneering spatial biology company in Seattle—filed for bankruptcy in February this year, the future of the company and its technology remained unknown. Although Joe Beechem, PhD, NanoString’s founding CSO at the time, was adamant that the company was “not going anywhere,” the ongoing legal battle with 10x Genomics and subsequent financial troubles begged to differ.
Three months later, NanoString was acquired by Bruker for approximately $392.6 million in cash and the assumption of certain liabilities. But Bruker remained tight-lipped about its intentions. Until now, that is. Here, for the first time, Mark Munch, PhD, president of Bruker Nano Group and Todd Garland, president of Bruker Spatial Biology, talk to GEN about Bruker’s reasons for the acquisition and where they see it going.
Bruker Nano Group has created a new division—the Bruker Spatial Biology Group—that houses NanoString, Canopy Biosciences (which Bruker acquired in 2020), and a third company, Acuity Spatial Genomics (which Munch co-founded in 2021). The headquarters of Bruker Spatial Biology, jokes Munch, is “wherever Todd is.” (Garland lives outside of Sacramento.) In reality, each arm of the division will remain in the location where it originated, to “avoid disruptions,” notes Munch: NanoString in Seattle, WA; Canopy in St. Louis, MO; and Acuity Spatial Genomics in San Jose, CA.
Munch has a true affinity for spatial biology; he built Acuity Spatial Genomics in his “spare time” during his evenings and weekends. Acuity has been in stealth mode until now, but Munch asserts that more of the technology—developed by Ting Wu, PhD, at Harvard Medical School, which offers visualization of the 3D genome—will be available in the near future.
Munch trained in chemical engineering at Stanford University and has a strength in optics. He approaches spatial with a physicist’s perspective because, he says, a PhD in chemical engineering is “a lot like applied physics.” He finds spatial so rewarding, he says, because it is one of the most interdisciplinary fields out there, spanning physics, optics, engineering, microbiology, chemistry, software, and data science. “From good science comes good business,” is one of his favorite sayings. And “there is just a lot of good science to be had in these different segments of spatial,” he notes.
This interview with Julianna LeMieux, PhD, deputy editor in chief at GEN, has been edited for length and clarity.
LeMieux: Why did Bruker acquire NanoString?
Munch: We saw three really good platforms and really good people who had deep expertise in those platforms. The CosMX has always led in plex, and we see that continuing. And the GeoMX shouldn’t be overlooked because it is the only platform that can do whole transcriptome and 577 proteins. There’s nothing on the planet that can do that level of multiomics for region of interest-based exploration. And with the nCounter, which is the oldest of the platforms, we saw a whole new set of assays that we can develop and bring to market. So those three platforms are really strong.
When we first went into it, we thought, wow, those platforms are pretty strong. This is a really good business decision. And then the more due diligence we did, we said, wow, the people who understand those platforms are great people.
There is a solid business decision behind doing this; there is a good ROIC (Return on Invested Capital) on the acquisition. But there is another piece, which is that this is the best move for science. Keeping these platforms alive and going is super important to us. I think it would have been a shame for these not to continue. And we think Bruker was the best home for these to continue. That’s it in a nutshell.
LeMieux: Up until last year, Bruker was not really considered a spatial company. But now, you are a silver sponsor of AGBT. How does the acquisition of NanoString change your identity?
Munch: Bruker talks a lot about the post-genomic era. It’s not all about sequencing the linear genome. Biology is way too complex. You have to get a broader picture of what is happening. Part of that broader picture has to do with bringing more proteomics into the discussion. But part of the post-genomic era is about spatial, and understanding the complexity of cellular communication networks, and really trying to get more insights into the grander complexity of biology.
We see spatial as a very important segment in the strategy of Bruker leading the post-genomic era. We’ll continue in our proteomic work. But we’re also building out these other areas that add to that. Our goal is to be one of the technology leaders in spatial biology.
Bruker is a very innovative, entrepreneurial company, and that’s why we felt it is a good home for the NanoString assets. When we acquired Canopy, which didn’t even have an instrument, we developed the CellScape in record time. That’s classic Bruker!
We plan on doing a lot of really great things for science and spatial.
Garland: Having come through the purchase process, on the NanoString side, we were all very pleased about the outcome with Bruker. In part because it feels like a continuation of our existing culture. We have been known as an entrepreneurial, science-first, innovative company. And we have found that in our new home—a continuation of that entrepreneurial spirit, a definite orientation around putting the science first and that continuation of innovation. Joe [Beechem] has gotten really excited about the new things he can do as a part of a bigger company. There is so much excitement now at NanoString about the ability to continue our mission and do it in a space where they get us. And knowing now that we’re going to have the infrastructure and the support to be able to continue that has gotten our organization really excited.
LeMieux: How is NanoString going to fold into Bruker? What is going to stay the same and what is going to change? For example, current NanoString users want to know if they are going to be able to use the same instruments?
Munch: When you go into an acquisition, you are acquiring for the talent, the people, the technology, and the products. We will take all of those pieces forward. Nobody has to worry about, is my platform going to be discontinued? There is none of that. They all continue forward. In fact, it gets better because Bruker Nano has a robust strategy development process. We have great ideas of how we build on those three platforms. So, no worries at all. It just keeps going.
And regarding Canopy… we acquired Canopy years ago when they didn’t have an instrument. But at Bruker, we know instruments well. So, we put together a team and developed the CellScape for quantitative spatial proteomics. And all of these platforms fit nicely together.
The three platforms in spatial, CosMX, GeoMX, and CellScape, all are fit-for-purpose type platforms. They’re designed to do what they do best. In spatial biology, it’s not just one segment. There are a number of different needs that must be addressed. Each one of those product platforms was developed for a certain set of specific needs.
Also, in Q1 of 2025, you will see a fourth platform coming from Acuity Spatial Genomics that sits with GeoMX, CosMX, and CellScape. It will offer a new kind of spatial, which is direct visualization of the 3D genome in the nucleus.
They will all exist and continue and grow because they all are addressing the right solution for what the researcher is trying to do. In product development, if you try to address everything at once, that’s the road to compromise. It’s not how you end up with the best products.
The road to failure, and the road to mediocrity, is to try to make a Swiss Army knife.
LeMieux: What about the R&D for these different platforms? Is the NanoString team working on NanoString and the CellScape team working on CellScape? Or is it all together?
Munch: We want to maintain focus. For the team who developed the CosMX, we want to keep them focused on it because they are not done yet. There are still a lot of things to do. The same thing goes for the GeoMX team. And the CellScape team. We will maintain that core of focus. And then we will find synergies—through coordination and sharing—so that, while a team is maintaining their roadmaps, they are also learning from each other.
LeMieux: What about new spatial products? Will there be a slide-based product?
Munch: There are compromises in those platforms, in terms of the type of information you can get. The box-based platforms have clearly evolved, and people vote with their dollars because they address needs, and they do what they do best. There’s another segment of people that will put up with the compromises of the products that don’t bring the same fidelity and the same information. But maybe they want a quick answer with a different capital investment. Those will exist, no doubt. But once you do that kind of work, then those researchers want to come back to the higher fidelity work.
That’s how I see that going forward. The box isn’t going away in this field at all. Boxes will continue to increase in their performance and functionality. And, more importantly, so will the breadth of assays that can be run on that box. And that’s really key. On those box-less solutions, there’s a compromise of performance, but there are also some limitations in the types of assays that can be run on those.
LeMieux: Five years from now, what innovations do you see Bruker spatial biology bringing to researchers?
Munch: Five years in spatial is a long time out! Because it’s a very dynamic space. Look at the CosMX… Joe [Beechem] talks about the whole transcriptome on the CosMX. We already have a proof of principle on that. And then once you’ve got to the whole transcriptome, then what?
There is still a lot to do on the data side. One thing I hear all the time from customers is that it’s not hard to acquire the spatial map. They can get the images pretty quickly. The hard part is in digesting the data. So, in five years, I think that is going to be quite an exciting journey.
There are so many elements in the workflow that will continue to be optimized and will also include the involvement of machine learning AI techniques. All of that will happen more and more in the proteomics world and the product from Acuity Spatial Genomics. I see more and more assays (that always keeps happening) but also more sophistication in data and data analysis.
Garland: This is why we made the decision to make AtoMX a cloud-based solution—because of the computational power required as you continue to go up in plex. Having AtoMX decoupled physically from the hardware, and having it sit in the cloud, will allow us to do new things with data and informatics. Our customers are collecting huge terabytes of information that need to be analyzed. The next gen of this work is going to be about the data side of spatial biology.
