Search This Blog

Monday, April 1, 2019

AACR 2019 – Vitrakvi relapse findings justify Bayer’s interest

The Vitrakvi follow-on LOXO-195 yields results backing both the rationale behind its development and Bayer’s decision to take on full rights.
The approved TRK inhibitor Vitrakvi did not play a big part in Lilly’s $8bn takeout of its maker, Loxo, but the drug is a focus for Bayer, Loxo’s longer-standing partner. The related project LOXO-195 is at least as important for the German group, and clinical results unveiled today at the AACR meeting have underlined its value.
LOXO-195 is also a TRK inhibitor, but has been designed to work in patients who have relapsed on Vitrakvi or Roche’s rival, entrectinib, despite carrying a TRK kinase mutation. The AACR data back the hypothesis that LOXO-195 works in these subjects but not in others who relapse in different ways after first-line TRK therapy.
They come from 29 evaluable post-TRK-inhibitor subjects, derived from a phase I study and US compassionate-use programme. 20 of these patients had some kind of residual TRK mutation, but the rest either did not, or their status was unknown.
The overall remission rate in the 20 TRK mutants was an impressive 45%, said the lead investigator, Dr David Hyman, from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. The one caveat was that the data come from investigator assessment, and have not yet been independently reviewed.
But the results build on case reports, published in Cancer Drug Discovery back in 2017, in just two subjects who had progressed after Vitrakvi and had what is termed a Solvent Front mutation. Both developed partial responses after treatment with LOXO-195, it was reported.
What LOXO-195 did not demonstrate in the results presented at AACR further backs up the hypothesis behind its development. Namely, none of the three subjects with an identified bypass mechanism, meaning that TRK signalling was no longer driving the cancer, responded to LOXO-195.
LOXO-195 PHASE I (NCT03215511) & COMPASSIONATE-USE DATA
 SubjectsORR
TRK resistance mutation2045%
Solvent Front1450%
Gatekeeper425%
xDFG250%
Unknown/other*911%
Total2934%
Source: AACR; *3 identified bypass, 1 no identified TRK mutation or bypass alteration, 5 unknown.
Lilly acquired Loxo earlier this year, largely for its Ret kinase inhibitor LOXO-292. As soon as the deal closed Bayer exercised a change-of-control option, giving the German group full development rights to Vitrakvi and LOXO-195, which it now calls BAY 2731954.
It is interesting that Ignyta, maker of the rival TRK inhibitor entrectinib, also fell prey to a takeover, by Roche, although the focus of this deal was probably not TRK but Ros1, a mutation that Vitrakvi does not target. Entrectinib is now awaiting US approval.
Vitrakvi’s approval made the drug the second to get a green light irrespective of tumour type. Dr Hyman said TRK mutations were responsible for just 0.5% of all US cancer cases, but that many of these responded to Vitrakvi treatment.
He stressed that the AACR data suggested that LOXO-195 could eventually become a meaningful treatment for subjects whose cancers are resistant to first-generation TRK inhibitors. Bayer will no doubt be keen to point out that one such drug is entrectinib.

AACR: Apexigen, BMS steal the show with promising I-O combo in pancreatic cancer

Last August, tiny California biotech Apexigen revved up its pipeline with a $73 million venture roundthat allowed it to move its lead immuno-oncology candidate into clinical trials. Now, it’s rolling out early data from that research that are turning heads at the annual American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) meeting in Atlanta.
Apexigen is testing a combination of its CD40-activating antibody with Bristol-Myers Squibb’s PD-1 inhibitor Opdivo and chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. At AACR, they announced that the combination shrunk tumors in 20 out of 24 patients that could be analyzed in an interim review of a phase 1b study. The results were so encouraging that the trial has moved to phase 2, the presenters said.
Apexigen’s immuno-oncology drug candidate, APX005M, was designed to stimulate several elements of the immune system so that it’s better equipped to recognize and fight cancer. The company’s strategy is to combine it with other I-O treatments in cancer. Toward that end, it is collaborating with several drug developers in addition to BMS including Boehringer Ingelheim and Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen.

In the trial described at AACR, half the participants are receiving chemotherapy plus APX005M and half are getting that combo plus Opdivo. Most of the patients experienced side effects, but several were able to stay on the regimen for about a year, said investigators from the University of Pennsylvania, one of the clinical trial sites, during the AACR presentation.
“We are very excited about the encouraging data so far, especially because metastatic pancreatic cancer has a five-year survival rate of less than 9 percent, making it an area of high unmet medical need,” said the Parker Institute’s Chief Medical Officer Ramy Ibrahim, M.D., in a statement.
The AACR announcement marked the first clinical data out of a study funded by the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, which was founded in 2016 by Facebook billionaire Sean Parker. The institute developed the trial in collaboration with the I-O focused nonprofit Cancer Research Institute.
Apexigen is one of many biotechs focused on expanding the potential market for immune checkpoint inhibitors—and BMS has been more than happy to oblige with Opdivo. Its flagship I-O drug has struggled to compete in the market against Merck’s blockbuster Keytruda, which has proven effective in several cancer types, including most recently kidney cancer.
BMS did celebrate one other success at AACR this past weekend, announcing data from a phase 2 study showing that a combination of Opdivo and its other checkpoint inhibitor Yervoy performed well in patients with high-grade neuroendocrine tumors.
Apexigen, meanwhile, is eager to test combinations of Opdivo and APX005M in other cancers. Last summer, it said it was enrolling a phase 1 trial that will combine the two drugs along with cabiralizumab, an anti-CSF-1 antibody that BMS is developing with Five Prime Therapeutics. That trial is enrolling patients with lung cancer, melanoma and kidney cancer.
The Parker Institute’s Ibrahim believes the pancreatic cancer trial presented at AACR will benefit not only Apexigen’s other trials, but multiple other I-O combinations being tested around the world. “What we learn in this trial can inform the work being done on other solid tumor types, so that we can make immunotherapy beneficial for more patients,” Ibrahim said.

Settlement set to sling Soon-Shiong out of biotech investment

Patrick Soon-Shiong’s NantCell could lose its controlling stake in Precision Biologics through a legal settlement. The proposed settlement would effectively erase NantCell’s investment to clear up a case alleging Soon-Shiong improperly withdrew $47 million from Precision Biologics.
The case, details of which were reported by Law360, dates back to October 2015. That month, NantCell revealed it had paid $50 million to take a controlling stake in Precision Biologics, a startup working on antibodies to treat solid tumors.
Soon-Shiong framed the investment as part of the growing portfolio of programs intended to treat and diagnose cancer operating under his NantWorks umbrella. The investment has become better known for the legal case it triggered, though.
The case centers on the allegation that Soon-Shiong, NantCell and two related people on the board of Precision Biologics withdrew $47 million within 30 days of the $50 million investment. A Precision Biologics shareholder argued the withdrawal breached an investor rights agreement and the fiduciary duties of Soon-Shiong and his co-defendants.
Aspects of the case against Soon-Shiong fell away last year, but he is yet to escape the breach-of-duty claims. To resolve those outstanding allegations, the two sides have have spent more than a year discussing a potential settlement.
Now, details of the agreement have emerged. The settlement would effectively wind back the clock to before the NantCell investment. NantCell would return its stake in Precision Biologics, which, in turn, would hand back all the money it has left from the investment. NantCell would put $2.5 million into a fund shared by certain Precision Biologics shareholders.
The shareholders and defendants filed the settlement in the belief that “the terms contained in this stipulation are fair, adequate and in the best interests of plaintiff, the class and defendants, and it is reasonable to settle the action.” The defendants are not admitting wrongdoing.
Controversy has dogged Soon-Shiong in recent years. NantCell’s acquisition of Altor BioScience spawned lawsuits, including a case brought by Cher, and accusations of “looting.” Another part of the Nant portfolio, NantHealth, faces lawsuits alleging it made “material misstatements and omissions in violation of the federal securities laws” in relation to its IPO and could be delisted from Nasdaq.

Did Novartis hand out kickbacks or host educational dinners? A jury may decide

Kickbacks, $10,000 dinners and Hooters.
Details that sound pulled from an episode of Billions are key accusations in a federal lawsuit against Swiss drugmaker Novartis that could face a jury trial after a district judge’s order Monday.
U.S. District Court Judge Paul Gardephe refused Novartis’ request for summary judgment in an 8-year-old lawsuit accusing the company of holding sham promotional events to induce physicians to prescribe its drugs to patients.

Over the course of almost 80,000 promotional events between 2002 and 2011—all of which might be scrutinized as evidence in court—federal prosecutors say Novartis wined and dined doctors as part of a “companywide scheme” to boost scripts. Among some of the over-the-top allegations was a $10,000 dinner at Nobu, a chic New York seafood restaurant, and one promotional event held on a fishing boat without educational materials on board.
“We are disappointed in today’s decision and look forward to presenting our case at trial,” Novartis spokesman Eric Althoff said via email. “We continue to believe that the government has insufficient evidence to support its claims.”

While the original complaint dates to 2011, federal prosecutors got involved in 2013 and accused Novartis of providing fancy dinners and entertainment in exchange for physicians prescribing Novartis’ drugs to patients. The government argued doctors who accepted kickbacks had billed millions of dollars to Medicare and Medicaid over the span of nearly a decade, putting Novartis afoul of the False Claims Act.
Novartis, in a request for summary judgment, said prosecutors had not presented sufficient evidence of a “nationwide kickback scheme” and that the complaint did not establish a “quid pro quo” between the company and doctors. In addition, Novartis appealed to withhold key evidence in the lawsuit tied to a 2010 settlement with the federal government on various civil and criminal charges.
Gardephe, who previously said evidence from the nearly 80,000 events would be admissible in court, said he had seen enough.
“The Court concludes that … the Government has adduced sufficient particularized evidence of a company-wide kickback scheme, and that the ‘expert-created markers’—criteria indicating that a promotional event lacks a medical educational purpose or value—are admissible evidence of such a scheme,” Gardephe wrote.
In addition, Gardephe refused to grant the company’s request to omit evidence from the previous suit in a possible trial.
Althoff said the company did not engage in kickbacks but instead used its events—what Gardephe called “purportedly educational promotional programs”—as informational sessions for doctors.
“Novartis strongly believes in the importance of peer-to-peer education,” Althoff said. “Through these speaker programs, we provide information to healthcare professionals regarding the benefits and appropriate use of our medicines to help ensure that any prescription decisions are in the best interest of patients.”

The kickback suit continues a recent run of legal trouble for Novartis. In 2015, Novartis inked a $390 million civil settlement with the Feds on claims that it worked with specialty pharmacies to push two of its drugs in exchange for paying rebates.
Novartis was also ensnared in former U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russian collusion investigation in November 2017 after Michael Cohen, former personal attorney for President Donald J. Trump, acknowledged receiving $1.2 million from the company. NBC News reported a senior Novartis official said the payments followed Cohen pledging access to the Trump administration after his inauguration.
The Greek government launched a criminal probe in February 2018 on allegations that 10 politicians accepted bribes from Novartis to boost its sales. In March, Novartis said an internal probe into the alleged bribery scheme showed no trace of payments between the company and Greek politicians.

Care.com Corrects Recent Media Inaccuracies Re Services, Safety Protocols

Care.com CRCM, -6.63% the world’s largest online marketplace for finding and managing family care, issued the following statement to correct inaccuracies appearing in several recent media reports about the Company and its services.
With regard to safety vetting of caregivers:
Since launching in 2007, Care.com has been focused on helping families find in-home care solutions that best suit their needs. Recent media coverage has reported that Care.com performs no screening on the individuals listed on its site. To the contrary, we have been conducting various preliminary screenings on all individual caregivers on our site from the start of our service, and in mid-2009 began including as one such screening a search of certain available electronic criminal records. These preliminary screenings are intended to provide a baseline of safety for our online community. In addition, we offer three tiers of background checks that families can purchase and provide a comprehensive Safety Center with tools and recommendations on other steps they should take when choosing a caregiver to help ensure safe hiring decisions. Over the course of 12 years, with more than 1.5 million successful matches and strong repeat usage, we believe we have earned the trust of families.
With regard to the removal of unclaimed listings of childcare centers from the site:
We provide a directory of childcare centers for families seeking care outside of the home. These directory listings are not our primary offering to our millions of members. However, we believe they provide an important option for families given the predominance of child care deserts (today, half of Americans live in areas in which the number of children exceeds available childcare slots by a ratio of at least 3:1) and the need for more affordable care solutions. Marketing services revenue from these small and medium-sized businesses that provide childcare services represented less than 0.5% of the Company’s total revenue in 2018.
In the past, like many digital platforms, we used publicly available and third-party data sources to create free directory listings and provided the opportunity for these businesses to claim and enhance their listing. We have always noted on the site that we do not verify the information about childcare centers and again, encourage families to do their own due diligence to verify the information most important to them, such as licensing, references and the fit of the specific daycare for their child.
We recently made the decision to remove unclaimed childcare center listings, representing 45% of the total childcare centers in our database,in order to only include profiles provided or reviewed directly by the childcare center operators. The inclusion of these unclaimed listings in our database was unrelated both to our Care@Work back-up care offering and to the millions of individual caregivers who are the focus of our core consumer service.
With regard to caregiver profiles on our site:
The company’s decision to remove unclaimed childcare centers from our consumer marketplace database did not change or impact profiles of individual caregivers on Care.com.
Our site is constantly evolving and we are committed to helping families navigate the complexities of finding care for their loved ones, safely and with confidence.

Aceto Nasdaq trading to be suspended April 3

On February 19, 2019, Aceto Corporation, a New York corporation (the “Company”), and certain of its U.S. subsidiaries (collectively with the Company, the “Debtors”) each filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey. The Debtors have proposed to jointly administer their chapter 11 cases under the caption In re Aceto Corporation, et al. (the “Chapter 11 Cases”).
As previously disclosed, on February 21, 2019, the Company received a notification from the Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) informing the Company that, as a result of the Chapter 11 Cases and in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rules 5101, 5110(b) and IM-5101-1, Nasdaq had determined that the Company’s common stock would be delisted from Nasdaq. The Company timely appealed the delisting notice and appeared before the Nasdaq Hearings Panel (the “Panel”) on March 28, 2019. The Panel issued a decision on April 1, 2019 and determined to delist the Company’s common stock from Nasdaq. The suspension of trading will become effective at the open of business on April 3, 2019. The Panel also informed the Company that Nasdaq will complete the delisting by filing a Form 25 Notification of Delisting with the Securities and Exchange Commission, after the applicable appeals periods have lapsed.
The Company does not intend to appeal Nasdaq’s determination. Upon delisting, the Company expects that its common stock will commence trading on the OTC Pink Market, on April 3, 2019 under the symbol “ACETQ.” The transition does not affect the Company’s operations and does not change reporting requirements under SEC rules.

#AACR: Vaccibody, Nektar Present New Preclinical Data from Collaboration

Vaccibody AS and Nektar Therapeutics (Nasdaq: NKTR) today announced the presentation of new preclinical data for VB10.NEO, a personalized neoantigen cancer vaccine, combined with bempegaldesleukin (NKTR-214 or bempeg), a CD122-preferential IL-2 pathway agonist. These data were presented today in a poster session at the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2019.
‘We are excited to present these novel preclinical data that show combining bempeg with VB10.NEO synergize to increase both the breadth and the depth of the neoantigen-specific immune response. These unique and non-overlapping mechanisms produced an expansion of the VB10.NEO elicited neoantigen-specific T cells and demonstrated enhanced anti-tumor efficacy in mice. We look forward to evaluating this novel immuno-oncology combination in a clinical study in patients with advanced or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck later this year,’ said Agnete B. Fredriksen, Ph.D., Vaccibody’s President and Chief Scientific Officer.