One of the most striking features at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO 2025) Congress in Berlin, Germany, was the clear rise of China.

Chinese researchers’ names appeared repeatedly across major sessions, and the word “China” was visible throughout the poster halls.

Compared to previous years, more Chinese companies submitted abstracts, with some securing spots not only in ‘Late-breaking Abstract (LBA)’ presentations but also in the prestigious Presidential sessions, ESMO's highest-level presentations.

This was a scene rarely seen at global conferences just a few years ago. Particularly noteworthy is that despite most corresponding authors and key speakers of major abstracts being Chinese researchers, they were included in core sessions, underscoring the growing recognition and expectation for Chinese innovation in oncology.

Consequently, the ESMO 2025 press room saw a greater-than-usual number of Chinese journalists visiting for coverage.

A representative case was the Phase III study on sacituzumab tirumotecan (Sac-TMT), an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) jointly developed by Kelun-Biotech and Merck.

In particular, China is leading a large number of next-generation modality studies, including antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), bispecific antibodies, and immune-oncology combination therapies.

Industry experts at the scene said that China has evolved from being a ‘fast follower’ to becoming a ‘fast mover.’

This transformation is underpinned by government support, substantial capital, and a rapid clinical system. China's regulatory, clinical, and investment ecosystems are organically integrated, with global development taken into account from the earliest candidate stage. The short turnaround between clinical registration and publication has become a competitive advantage.

Of course, the sheer scale of China’s domestic market cannot be ignored. However, considering the recent wave of Chinese new drug data being presented at major academic conferences, the prevailing view is that it is no longer feasible to dismiss this as merely ‘for local use’.

It's not that Korean companies haven't produced meaningful data. Some garnered attention with novel mechanisms and technologies, but the issues lie in speed and scale. The gap with China was evident in the number of publications, the depth of clinical stages, and global expansion capabilities.

A researcher at the conference stated, “Even with promising candidates, the journey to clinical trials and approval is too slow. China is already opening institutional pathways at the national level.”

The challenge for Korea’s pharma industry is clear: while scientific foundations are strong, the sector must overcome constraints in capital and manpower that are required to scale this into clinical development..

The direction for Korea to take is already being demonstrated by some companies. There has been an increase in cases where overseas clinical trials and regulatory approval processes are designed together from the initial stages, and platform-focused research, such as ADCs and bispecific antibodies, is also expanding. However, it is difficult to say that this strategy has spread across the entire industry. Clinical trials prioritizing domestic approval and single-candidate-focused development still dominate.

Global design in new drug development is no longer a foreign concept in Korea. Many companies are designing overseas clinical trials and regulatory approval processes from the initial stages, keeping global expansion in mind. However, it is difficult to say that this strategy has become established across the entire industry. Clinical trials primarily targeting domestic approval and development centered on single candidates still constitute a significant portion.

To compete globally, Korea must strengthen platform-based scalability, clinical design capabilities, and the talent ecosystem that supports both. The government, too, must move beyond short-term project funding and establish a strategic system that integrates global clinical development with regulatory reform.

The pace of China’s progress, as this reporter felt in Berlin, is not merely in the sheer volume of research. It stemmed from a fundamental difference in the structure of the entire industry.

Drug development is no longer a contest of ideas but of systems. If Korea’s government continues to highlight biopharma as a national growth engine yet fails to keep pace with this shift, the country risks being relegated to the role of a spectator in the global pharmaceutical arena.