Search This Blog

Friday, April 5, 2019

Biotech crops still a sticking point in U.S.-China trade deal

China’s lengthy approval process for genetically modified crops remains a sticking point in talks to end the trade war between China and the United States, according to two sources with knowledge of the talks.

Beijing has taken years to approve new strains of GM crops, which U.S. companies and farmers have complained stalls trade by restricting the sales of new products from companies such as DowDuPont Inc, Bayer AG, and Syngenta AG.
The issue is one of a host of U.S. complaints that the administration of President Donald Trump is demanding China address if it wants to end trade disputes that have cost both countries billions of dollars and slowed the global economy.
Trump on Thursday said the two sides were getting very close to a deal that could be announced in about four weeks, though there were still differences to be bridged.
GM crops and the approval process are still a “big issue” in the discussions, said one of the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The issue has been a source of tension between the two countries for years. China is the biggest buyer of U.S. soybeans, the bulk of which are genetically modified. If it does not approve new strains, then farmers in the United States cannot plant them because China may reject shipments that include them.
Seed companies cannot fully commercialize sales of new strains without those approvals. The two sides had appeared to make some progress on the issue in January, when China approved a handful of GMO crops for import. They were the first in about 18 months. The move did not address the core U.S. concerns over delays to the process.
A spokeswoman from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, who is leading the Washington team in the discussions, did not respond immediately to request for confirmation or comment.
It is unclear what differences on the issue remain. The United States wants China to accelerate its approval process and make it more similar to Washington’s.
Beijing allows imports of GMO soybeans and corn for use in animal feed, even though it does not permit planting of them.
China bought about 60 percent of U.S. soy exports, worth about $12 billion, before the ongoing U.S.-China trade war and could reject shipments of unapproved varieties.
Beijing promised to speed up its review of applications during previous trade talks with the United States in 2017. In the past, Beijing has held back approvals of imported GMO products amid concerns about anti-GMO sentiment in China.
The trade deal, should it be agreed, is expected to include a six-year time frame for purchases of more than $1 trillion in U.S. goods, including commodity products.

Drug-Pricing Watchdog Thinks Biogen’s Spinraza Should Be Cheaper

Biogen’s Spinraza (nusinersen) is currently the only approved drug for infants with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). SMA is a rare, autosomal recessive neuromuscular disease characterized by the degeneration of alpha motor neurons in the spinal cord. This results in progressive muscle weakness and paralysis. According to the Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, the estimated incidence is 1 in 6,000 to 1 in 10,000 live births.
The current price for Spinraza is $750,000 for the first year and $375,000 for every year after for the life of the patient. It is approved for all forms of SMA, types 0 through 5.
The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), a drug-pricing watchdog organization,issued a Final Evidence Report and Report-at-a-Glance assessment comparing the drug’s effectiveness and value and its price. It also evaluated a likely competitive product not-yet-approved, Novartis/AveXis’ Zolgensma. Zolgensma has dazzled in Phase III trials and is likely to be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the last half of this year. At this time, it is only for patients with Type 1.

Although filled with quite a few exceptions and complicated rationales, the report ultimately believes that Spinraza is too expensive for what it’s worth and that Zolgensma, which doesn’t have a price yet, probably will too.
“Both Spinraza and Zolgensma dramatically improve the lives of children with SMA and that of their families,” stated David Rind, ICER’s chief medical officer. “However, the current price of Spinraza far exceeds common thresholds for cost-effectiveness. The price of Zolgensma is not yet known, but there has been public discussion of prices above commonly accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds as well. These treatments will be covered by U.S. insurers regardless of the pricing, but the ripple effect of pricing decisions like these threatens the overall affordability and sustainability of the U.S. health system.”
The ICER report took into account a dizzying range of factors, including clinical benefits and economic value, “including the ability of patients to gain dignity and independence even from very small improvements in motor function, and broader effects on families, including greater freedom, reduced stress, and lower financial burden related to transportation and other costs. Council members also unanimously recognized that Zolgensma, administered in a one-time dose, offers less complexity than Spinraza.”
Keeping in mind that ICER’s report doesn’t have any binding effect on the FDA, insurers or the companies themselves, the report calculated that Spinraza’s price for patients with presymptomatic SMA should be between $72,000 and $130,000 for the first year of treatment and between $36,000 and $65,000 for each successive year.
They also calculated an alternative price based on “100,000-$150,000 per Life Year Gained (LYG),” which would be $83,000 to $145,000 for pre-symptomatic patients in the initial year and $41,000 to $72,000 for each successive year.
They didn’t make a similar vote on Zolgensma because it hasn’t been approved and, as such, doesn’t have a price, but taking into consideration that Zolgensma will supposedly be a one-and-done therapy requiring no follow-up treatments, they suggest the price should be between $710,000 and $1.5 million per treatment.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the companies involved disagree. Biogen told Xconomy, that ICER “appropriately acknowledges the substantial health benefits of [nusinersen]” and the “significant difference in robustness and quality of evidence” between nusinersen and Zolgensma, but also pointed out that to date, Zolgensma had only been tested in 15 patients with a 2.5-year follow-up, while Spinraza has been evaluated in more than 300 patients for up to six years, and the ICER report didn’t take that into consideration. In addition, Biogen recently noted that more than 6,600 infants, children and adults have been treated with Spinraza worldwide.
Novartis, for its part, questioned ICER’s methodology, telling Xconomy that ICER’s methodology is designed around the “status quo of chronic care management and cannot possibly capture the full benefits” of a single-dose gene therapy. Novartis also pointed out that “multiple stakeholders,” including NICE, the UK’s drug pricing authority, have been looking at gene and cell therapies to “create more relevant models to assess potentially curative treatments.”
And Dave Lennon, president of AveXis, told Xconomy that Novartis is “working with payers to rethink established payments models with pay-over time options.” He added, “Chronic lifetime treatments are costing the healthcare system tens of millions of dollars over a patient’s lifetime. One-time, potentially curative gene therapies require our healthcare system to be just as innovative on the payment side.”
SMA type I, the severest form, is almost always fatal by two years of age, with a 50% mortality rate by 7 months and a 90% mortality rate by 12 months. A 2009 study found that with nutritional and respiratory care, a greater percentage of those patients were living beyond 2 years of age. Patients with Types II and III typically live into adulthood and could potentially have a normal life expectancy, although with a great deal of healthcare services. But now, with Spinraza and potentially Zolgensma, those patients have a chance of living a full, normal life. It’s hard to put a price on that.

Genmab Submits Application in Japan for Multiple Myeloma Combo

  • Supplemental new drug application (sNDA) submitted in Japan for daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone as treatment for patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma who are not candidates for high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant
  • Submission based on data from Phase III MAIA study

NIH Begins Trial of Potential Universal Flu Vaccine

The flu season is almost over and from physicians’ accounts, it has been a bad one across the United States – even for those people who received a flu shot in the fall.
Globally, there are about 650,000 deaths from the flu worldwide and millions of people are hospitalized due to the illness. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, those people who are considered at high risk of serious flu complications include people over the age of 65, as well as people who have pre-existing conditions such as asthma, diabetes, heart disease or chronic lung disease.
While there are flu shots available for patients, they are not guarantees that a patient will not get the flu, as there are multiple strains of the bug that the shot does not necessarily provide protection. Things could be changing for the better though. This week, scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched a trial to examine a potential universal flu vaccine candidate, known as H1ssF_3928. According to the NIH, the experimental vaccine is designed to “teach the body to make protective immune responses against diverse influenza subtypes by focusing the immune system on a portion of the virus that varies relatively little from strain to strain.” The hope is that H1ssF_3928 will provide long-lasting protection from many strains of the flu for all age groups.
The vaccine candidate was developed by a team of NIH scientists attached to the agency’s Vaccine Research Center (VRC) Clinical Trials Program. H1ssF_3928 displays part of hemagglutinin (HA), an influenza protein, on the surface of a microscopic nanoparticle made of nonhuman ferritin, NIH said in a statement. Ferritin is a natural protein found in cells and is useful as a vaccine platform “because it forms particles that can display multiple influenza HA spikes on its surface, mimicking the natural organization of HA on the influenza virus,” according to the NIH. HA enables the influenza virus to enter a human cell and the body can then mount an immune response.

The VRC team anticipates enrollment in the Phase I trial to be completed by the end of 2019 and expects to begin reporting results in early 2020. Trial participants will record their temperature and any symptoms on a diary card for one week after each injection. They also will be asked to visit the clinic to provide blood samples at various time points. Investigators will test the samples in the laboratory to characterize and measure levels of anti-influenza antibodies. The patients will not be exposed to any influenza virus as part of the clinical trial.
“Seasonal influenza is a perpetual public health challenge, and we continually face the possibility of an influenza pandemic resulting from the emergence and spread of novel influenza viruses,” National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony S. Fauci said in a statement. “This Phase 1 clinical trial is a step forward in our efforts to develop a durable and broadly protective universal influenza vaccine.”
Other headway is being made in the battle against the flu. Last year, a group of scientists launched a study of a llama antibody as a potential flu vaccine. A team from the Scripps Institute in Southern California has been able to take antibodies made by llamas and used them as the basis for a flu vaccine. The llama antibodies are effective enough to work on a wide number of flu viruses, according to the report.
Also last year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Genentech’s Xofluza, a single-dose treatment for the flu, the first new flu treatment greenlit by the FDA in nearly 20 years.

Thursday, April 4, 2019

Piper Jaffray stays Overweight on Alder Biopharma, Amgen after Novartis filing

Piper Jaffray analyst Christopher Raymond maintains his Overweight rating on Alder Biopharma (ALDR) and Amgen (AMGN) after the filing by Novartis (NVS) alleging legal dispute with the latter about their migraine collaboration. The analyst says that Novartis tried to beat Amgen to the punch after entering agreement with Alder to manufacture eptinezumab, which prompted Amgen to terminate their commercialization agreement. Raymond adds that a resolution of this dispute could take a year or more but believes that investors may conclude that the spat reflects the value of anti-CGRP assets

Acceleron ACE-2494 program was ‘high-risk’, says Piper Jaffray

Piper Jaffray analyst Danielle Brill keeps her Overweight rating and $74 price target on Acceleron after its discontinued Phase 1 safety trial of ACE-2494. The analyst says the program was already seen as ” high-risk due to several failures with similar approaches” and it was not included in her valuation. The analyst keeps a positive view on the stock, expecting the company’s Phase 2 myelofibrosis data to drive shares higher in the second half of 2019.

Is Walgreens CEO Pessina Opening Up To A Big Merger?

After what he called “the most difficult quarter” since Walgreens Boots Alliance was formed, Stefano Pessina may be leaning toward more than just executing partnerships as a way to grow the global drugstore chain and boost its battered stock price.
The Italian billionaire, who is Walgreens CEO and biggest individual shareholder, has long said he prefers partnerships rather than a large transformative acquisition. There’s been speculation dating back two years that Walgreens will buy the rest of giant distributor AmerisourceBergen Corp. that it doesn’t own or might acquire a health insurer like Humana, which already has a joint venture with the drugstore giant to develop senior health clinics.
But Walgreens hasn’t made a sizable acquisition since its $4.4 billion purchase of more than 1,900 Rite Aids and Wall Street appears to be getting restless. By comparison, CVS Health spent $70 billion to buy Aetna, the nation’s third-largest health insurer.
After being pressed on Walgreens quarterly earnings call by the noted J.P. Morgan analyst Lisa Gill, Pessina revealed the drugstore chain was reviewing some targets.
“We are constantly reviewing a certain number of companies,” Pessina said on a longer-than-usual 90-minute call Tuesday to discuss earnings. “Don’t ask me the names, I cannot give you the names. But of course, until now, we have not found the right numbers to do a combination with these companies.”
Wall Street is looking for results from Walgreens partnership strategy after the drugstore chain in the last three years has signed deals with Microsoft,the grocer Kroger, Humana and UnitedHealth Group’s urgent care business. For much of the last two years, such deals have been testing concepts and piloting healthcare services and technology to develop what executives have called the “drugstore of the future.”
But the partnerships won’t churn out profits for awhile.
“On the partnership front, for the first time (Walgreens) highlighted the multiple partnerships formed over the past few years probably will not be accretive to earnings until 2022, which is likely later than street expectations,” Mizuho Securities USA analyst Ann Hynes wrote this week.
Meanwhile, Pessina has said repeatedly for the last two years that he’s not going to execute a big merger or acquisition for the sake of doing one even though he said this week “some acquisition could be done mainly financing them through cash.”
“I can just give the same answer that I have given in the past,” Pessina said, responding to JP Morgan’s Gill. “We are open to any kind of partnership which makes sense, which is compatible with what we are doing, provided that the price is correct and provided that the organization of the company that we buy or that we merge is compatible with us because the prices are important. But also if you don’t have a compatible teams at the end, the merger will not work and you will not be able to deliver synergies.”