Search This Blog

Friday, December 20, 2019

Upcoming events – TG’s long-awaited outcome; Insmed’s mid-stage lung data

After making investors wait more than a year, TG Therapeutics is gearing up to release results of its lead leukaemia combo, while Insmed hopes to succeed in a very tricky condition.
Welcome to your weekly roundup of approaching clinical readouts. In the coming weeks TG Therapeutics will unveil survival data from the Unity-CLL trial, a readout that became harder to handicap after the company controversially rowed back on conducting an overall response analysis last year.
At the time, TG executives claimed that the data were not sufficiently mature to take a look at ORR, though concerns were raised that the trial had actually drawn a blank (A dose of reality as TG Therapeutics kicks the can down the road, September 26, 2018).
The Unity-CLL study pits ublituximab and umbralisib – TG’s two experimental projects, respectively an anti-CD20 antibody and a PI3K delta inhibitor – against Roche’s Gazyva and the chemo chlorambucil. Patients with both treated and untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia have been recruited, with progression-free survival as the primary endpoint. TG has said results will appear in late 2019 or early 2020.
If TG really had failed to see a difference in ORR last year, disappointment could be on the horizon, as survival tends to be closely correlated with response. Gazyva’s label cites median PFS of 26.7 months versus 14.9 months for control, and ORR of 80% against 66%, in front-line patients. Around 60% of Unity-CLL subjects are thought to be front line; TG has previously suggested that the median numbers to beat are 27-28 months in first-line and 14-15 months in relapsed CLL.
Other concerns include the unique strategy of testing two unproven agents together in a pivotal trial. TG has received the FDA’s blessing for the design but this does not rule out the possibility of regulatory hold-ups down the road, should the results not provide clear evidence of efficacy. Toxicity will be closely watched.
With both front line and refractory patients enrolled, there would seem to be potential for TG to seek relevance in subgroups, should significance not be hit in the total trial population. But after waiting for so long, investors will be hoping that the waters are not muddied once again.
Risky business
The phase II Willow trial of Insmed’s INS1007 in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis, data from which are expected in the coming quarter, is a high-risk, high-reward play. The project is a reversible inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase I, and the fate of the only other such agent to reach the clinic does not make for comforting reading.
Glaxosmithkline was forced to abandon development of GSK2793660 after its first-in-human study revealed the unexpected toxicity of epidermal desquamation – skin peeling – on patients’ hands and feet. INS1007 avoided this in earlier trials, its phase I showing good tolerability, but must still prove its worth in a larger patient population.
Bronchiectasis is characterised by pathological dilation of the airways. This is diagnosed radiographically, since the condition’s clinical presentations vary widely; this heterogeneity is the main reason for difficulty in achieving endpoints in clinical trials. DPP1 catalyses the activation of neutrophil serine proteases, which drive chronic inflammatory lung diseases. Insmed licensed INS1007 from Astrazeneca in 2016 for $30m upfront and a host of milestone and royalty payments.
Willow is testing the small molecule as a once-daily pill of either 10 or 25mg, taken for six months, versus placebo. The primary endpoint is time to first pulmonary exacerbation, with the company believed to be seeking a 40% delta between treatment and placebo arms. Insmed’s management has acknowledged that a clear effectiveness signal may prove elusive owing to the differing signs and symptoms seen in bronchiectasis.
If data are mixed, there will be little point in the company pursuing INS1007 given that 40% of non-CF bronchiectasis already overlaps with nontuberculous mycobacterial lung infections. Insmed could still capture a sizeable proportion of these patients through its marketed inhaled antibiotic Arikayce.
Possibly because of the trickiness of showing a benefit in this disease, forecasts for INS1007 are modest at just $18m in 2024, according to EvaluatePharma’s consensus data. If the trial hits, expect these to increase sharply – as indeed will Insmed’s stock.

Plenty of choice remains for buyers of gene therapy

Despite the recent flurry of gene therapy deals there is still a fairly extensive list of affordable companies out there.
Roche finally got its $4.8bn acquisition of Spark Therapeutics over the finishing line this week, and without having to sell off any assets. The conclusion of the Federal Trade Commission’s 10-month investigation, without conditions, could tempt other potential buyers of gene therapy assets back into the market.
Astellas Pharma’s $3bn play for Audentes Theapeutics earlier this month showed there is definite interest from pharma groups wishing to add new technologies to their pipelines. So far this year acquirers have spent over $17bn on products holding out the promise of a “one and done” treatment. A seeming willingness by regulators to approve novel gene therapy products has also helped drive interest.
With the Spark deal now done and Audentes also taken off the board, investor speculation has inevitably turned to who might be might be next, with the likes of Rocket Therapeutics and Regenexbio seeing their shares rise in the wake of the Audentes deal. In this analysis we look at some of the public and private gene therapy companies which might be ripe for due diligence.
Luxury end
When it comes to M&A speculation in the gene therapy space a number of names regularly crop up, Amicus Therapeutics, Bluebird Bio and Uniqure among them.
Uniqure, for example, has one of the most promising haemophilia B gene therapies in the form of AMT-061. Despite being tested in only a handful of patients the company has achieved a market cap of $3bn. Anyone wishing to make a move might want to do so ahead of the readout of the pivotal Hope-B trial at the end of next year.
But if Uniqure’s price tag looks a little rich even before any acquisition premium is added, there are plenty of other lower-profile, more affordable gene therapy companies out there, both public and private.
SELECTED GENE THERAPY COMPANIES
CompanyClinical gene therapy programs Stage of most advanced assetMarket cap ($m)
Uniqure5Phase III3,053
Orchard Therapeutics6Marketed1,453
Homology Medicines1Phase II941
Meiragtx6Phase II784
Oxford Biomedica6Phase II553
Voyager Therapeutics2Phase II512
Abeona Therapeutics2Phase II151
Lysogene1Phase III27
Aruvant Sciences1Phase IIPrivate
Freeline Therapeutics1Phase IIIPrivate
Source: EvaluatePharma.
As the Astellas deal shows, companies with their own gene therapy manufacturing capabilities and expertise will be in demand. Abeona Therapeutics, Meiragtx, Homology Medicines, and Oxford Biomedica all boast technology platforms capable of pumping out projects.
One of the oldest among these is Oxford Biomedica. The UK firm is finally seeing its decades-long focus on gene therapy bear fruit with its own pipeline of six clinical products, and collaborations with Sanofi, Novartis and other groups to provide lentiviral vector manufacturing. The group’s UK listing could also explain its low-looking market cap of $553m, despite planned ramp-ups in its production capabilities.
Ironically, one of Oxford Biomedica’s clients and fellow UK gene therapy group, Orchard Therapeutics, has managed to outpace its supplier on the valuation front. The US-listed company boasts six clinical products and in-licensed asset Strimvelis.
Better the gene therapy devil you know
While technology platforms are always welcome, deal activity is also likely to focus on popular therapy areas: ophthalmology, neurology and rare diseases.
Meiragtx can count itself among the bigger ophthalmology players. The New York-based biotech is currently capitalised at $784m, and boasts a substantial AAV vector platform of six clinical stage gene therapies. Meiragtx’s ability to pump out pipeline products has already attracted the attention of big pharma with Johnson & Johnson opting to license three of its ophthalmology projects.
One company that is actively courting interest is Abeona, which effectively hung up the for-sale sign in September. The group is also looking a lot cheaper following a slide in the shares after the FDA put a clinical hold on moving its lead product EB-101 into phase III in September. In-house manufacturing facilities and four clinical projects might blunt any buyer concerns.
For those more comfortable with risk, Voyager Therapeutics could represent a good punt. The company has hitched its gene therapy wagon to the central nervous system and has two products in the clinic for Parkinson’s disease. Given the issues with drug-based treatments for neurological conditions, gene therapy might be a potential solution, notwithstanding the significant challenges that remain here. These diseases can involve multiple genes and their biology is often not well understood.
This list, which is far from exhaustive, shows that there are gene therapy companies out there that might not break the bank. But those wanting to grab a slice of the action should remember that considerable risks remain in this space: the duration of effect of these treatments remains unknown, for example, while reimbursement questions linger. The phrase caveat emptor seems pertinent.

5 updates on Walmart’s healthcare push

Walmart is among the “unconventional” players to enter the healthcare market in recent years. Below are five updates on the company.
1. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Walmart on Dec. 10 opened their first telehealth services pilot location in Asheboro, N.C.
2. Walmart opened its first freestanding health center in September, and the company has hired a new executive to help the company grow its healthcare business.
3. Walmart is testing new healthcare benefits and expanding a few existing programs for its employees in 2020 in an effort to cut its healthcare costs.
4. Walmart is recommending its employees use one of 800 imaging centers found to provide more accurate diagnoses.
5. Retail giant Walmart is upping its efforts to hand-pick which physicians are most likely to reduce healthcare spending on employees.

Major Cancer Center’s CEO, Staff Resign over Chinese Payments

The top executive at the Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute in Tampa, Florida, and a fellow executive have resigned this week for “violations of conflict of interest rules through their work in China,” according to a press statement from the institution that offered scant details.
Alan List, MD, chief executive officer and president of the center, and Thomas Sellers, PhD, the center’s director, have both left.
Four Moffitt researchers have also undergone “separation” from the institution related to the same circumstances, the statement noted.
The National Cancer Institute–designated center said that it found “several compliance violations” after initiating a review of staff members’ collaborations with research institutions in China.
The internal review was prompted by an earlier warning to US research centers from the National Institutes of Health about “foreign efforts to influence or compromise US researchers.” Moffitt said its review “focused on its team members’ participation in China’s ‘Thousand Talents’ Program, which recruits global researchers and academics.”
On Twitter, US Congressman Chris Sprowls (R-FL) said that the resignations were tied to secret payments from China and suggested that illegal exploitation of US biomedical research was intended.
Chris Sprowls@ChrisSprowls
The actions of Moffitt’s CEO and implicated researchers are indefensible.  To accept vast sums of public money – state and Federal – and then have the CEO and other employees secretly accepting money from China violates the public trust. https://twitter.com/tb_times/status/1207402938391384064 
Tampa Bay Times
✔@TB_Times
Moffitt Cancer Center shakeup: CEO and others resign over China ties http://dlvr.it/RLXN4Y 
He further commented: “We cannot allow China or other foreign governments to covertly exploit American research paid for by American taxpayers.”
Moffitt said there is no indication that the institution’s research was compromised, but provided no details.
The abrupt resignations are related to “possible exploitation of American-funded research by China,” according to a news report in the Tampa Bay Times.
Moffitt must “come clean” about exactly what center staff have done with Chinese entities, comments an accompanying editorial in the newspaper
Jose Olivia, speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, called for an investigation in a Twitter post.
Jose Oliva@RepJoseOliva
“The news coming out of Moffitt Cancer Center are of great concern and compel further investigation. While Moffitt’s leadership acted swiftly and decisively, a deeper look into this and all of our institutions is in order. 1/3
Moffitt said that it is now “thoroughly reviewing” its 12-year partnership with China’s Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital for the training of oncology practitioners.
Moffitt and Tianjin have conducted joint research projects whereby graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, physician scientists, and research nurses from Tianjin came to Moffitt from training. Tianjin is located in a free trade zone that expedited approvals for clinical trials, according to a 2018 Moffitt release cited in the Tampa Bay Tribune.
“This was an unfortunate but necessary decision,” said Timothy J. Adams, Moffitt board chairman, about the staff resignations, which were reportedly pressured.
The Florida center also acknowledged that “in recent years, the federal government has become concerned about foreign interests targeting US universities and academic medical centers to duplicate technology and intellectual property.”
In a related matter, three researchers at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, were fired in April 2019 because of concerns about spying and intellectual property theft, as reported by the New York Times and other news outlets.

Biogen and the desperation of a need for Alzheimer’s drugs

Biogen is set to provoke an early pointer of the direction the FDA will take under new Commissioner Stephen Hahn. Having made the shock decision to resurrect aducanumab after it failed a phase 3 futility analysis, Biogen is set to file for FDA approval of the Alzheimer’s disease drug next year.
The submission will be a test of how far Hahn’s FDA is willing to diverge from its established approval standards. Under U.S. law, companies need to show “substantial” evidence of effectiveness to win approval. Biogen will arrive at the FDA with results from one trial that suggest aducanumab is no better than placebo and data from another that link it to improved scores on a dementia scale.
Biogen and some physicians think the overall data set shows aducanumab works. Many analysts are more skeptical, arguing that Biogen’s data, which even its supporters admit are complex, are too weak to constitute “substantial” evidence.
Under Hahn’s predecessor, the FDA approved drugs on the basis of evidence that many outsiders saw as insubstantial, but those products typically targeted rare diseases. Alzheimer’s is on a different scale entirely. Other companies will be closely watching how Hahn’s FDA handles the chance to finally get a new treatment to Alzheimer’s patients.

Blood testing nears turning point as evidence becomes undeniable

Blood has always held the keys to our bodies’ health: it helps carry nutrients in and waste out, and interrogating it can provide solace when we are well and answers when we are sick.
Blood testing is ubiquitous, but it’s clear its possibilities are unfulfilled. Through different methods and modalities, these diagnostics promise to be a more accessible, less invasive, smarter, cheaper and a comprehensive way to gather knowledge about what’s going on under the skin—whether in a doctor’s office, at home or within a clinical laboratory.
The field has seen setbacks. Theranos’ well-parsed rise, fall and legacy have cast doubts on other companies’ efforts to develop potentially disruptive technologies, especially those along the same lines. But a steady march of clinical data, engineering successes and FDA backing have shown that, yes, these ideas can work when they’re done right. And in 2020, blood-based diagnostics, liquid biopsy tests and their makers may all reach a watershed moment.
Take Truvian Sciences, for example. The company just raised $27.1 million to further its countertop blood testing machine, which aims to subject a single blood sample to 40 of the most common analyses ordered by physicians, and in nearly any location. Sound familiar?
When taking that pitch to prospective investors, how many do you think said: “Well, I’ve heard that one before”?
“The answer to that question is everybody,” Truvian President and CEO Jeff Hawkins told FierceMedTech.
“In the end, I think what Theranos did do is that it created a shift in the market—where there are investors who say, ‘We’re comfortable diligencing technology, teams and regulatory strategies,’ and were willing to invest in our series B,” said Hawkins, who previously served as VP and general manager of Illumina’s reproductive and genetic health business. “They understand the path it takes to get from here to a product.”
“And then there were other investors who—maybe from their takeaway from the Theranos time and thinking about their own capabilities—were saying, ‘No, we’re interested in what you’re doing, but we’ve decided as a fund to wait to invest in this space until a company makes a submission to the FDA,’” he said.
The skepticism Truvian received actually evolved as more and more of the Theranos story came to light, not to mention the debut of the comprehensive book by the Wall Street Journal’s chronicler, John Carreyrou.
Early on, while there were concerns that Theranos’ claims were a fraud, the story also made the technical challenges sound insurmountable. But after it became clear how deep the fraud itself ran—and that their flawed approaches were not the only way forward—questions about engineering obstacles became less frequent, Hawkins said.
Instead, “it put a tremendous amount of emphasis on the team you were building, and the types of investors or independent advisors that were in the company and planning to participate,” he said. Then came the scrutiny of the company’s validation strategy and regulatory path, and in much stronger terms than before Elizabeth Holmes’ time in the spotlight.
Out from Theranos’ Shadow
Since then, we’ve seen companies like Guardant Health, which showed that its blood-based cancer DNA test could actually outperform traditional tissue biopsies when profiling non-small cell lung cancer cases. Meanwhile, Grail’s liquid biopsy demonstrated it could detect and differentiate a dozen early-stage cancers before they had a chance to metastasize to the rest of the body. And Foundation Medicine’s blood test proved it was able to predict higher risks of breast cancer recurrence by sifting out genetic material from tumors.
One of the companies contributing to the bevy of supporting clinical data is the cancer-focused Epic Sciences, maker of a liquid biopsy that profiles tumor cells found circulating in the bloodstream.
At this month’s San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, Epic presented two research studies of people with metastatic or triple-negative disease, showing its technology could spot the underlying genomic biomarkers by observing the shapes, features and differences between cells.
By classifying and sorting these commingled cancer cells from blood samples—and identifying which cell groups may be weak to certain drugs, while others may not—Epic believes its test could help predict overall responses to treatment.
“Just by looking at the cells and using some fancy artificial intelligence and a computer vision program, we can segregate these cancer cell populations,” said Chockalingam Palaniappan, Epic’s chief technology officer. “That can tell you that your prognosis is poor, but that you may actually respond well to a PARP inhibitor or you may well respond to cisplatin versus the current drug regimen.”
“There is a high degree of genomic instability inside these cells, and just by visualizing them, we can do a genotypic interpretation by looking at morphological features. That’s a big deal,” Palaniappan added.
He describes Epic’s single-cell profiling approach as looking for a needle in a haystack full of needles. You can look for the shape of an individual needle—that is, the cell’s physical characteristics—but you can also analyze and match the threads tied to the needle’s end, by sequencing their DNA. Other times, you can observe how the needles interact with each other.
“The beauty of Epic’s technology is that from a single tube of blood you can get comprehensive cancer profiling—with genotypic analysis, phenotypic analysis and immune profiling, plus single-cell and circulating tumor DNA sequencing,” Palaniappan said.
“If you can do that, then you have a very comprehensive view. And that’s what the world is evolving towards,” he said. “Patient’s blood is very precious. You want to get that comprehensive cancer profiling from that one tube of blood that they have to offer.”
FDA Clearance and Market Potential
One step in that evolution has already been taken by the Israeli startup Sight Diagnostics, which received a coveted FDA 510(k) green light this month for its countertop blood cell counter.
Similar in form factor to Theranos’ and Truvian’s objectives, Sight’s OLO analyzer uses two drops of blood to perform a complete blood count analysis, or a CBC test.
Through digital microscopy and AI vision, the system visually tallies the numbers of red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets to give a quick snapshot of a person’s health. Included in over 90% of baseline blood tests, CBCs can also help determine if an ailment is viral or bacterial.
Going forward, Sight hopes to obtain a waiver from CLIA laboratory regulations that would allow OLO’s use in smaller U.S. practices and retail pharmacies. That could potentially increase the number of potential sites for the device by 10 times, according to Sight’s chief commercial officer, Assi Gol.
“That is always been our path. We have every intention to go down that line,” Gol said. “In everywhere that we operate in the U.S., it is clear that the people we deal with are disciplined, and data- and evidence-driven. But without an FDA approval it’s a non-starter.”
According to Gol, one of the factors shaping the industry is the drive toward “smartwatchification”—or the drive to shrink everything that can be shrunk, until it can fit on a person’s wrist.
“Things are becoming smaller, closer, more constant and less painful,” he said. “Anything we can do with a finger prick and not a venous sample will be done with a finger prick and not a venous sample.”
The science and the proof just have to catch up.
“In the early days there were some concerns about whether the technology was sensitive enough,” said Epic’s Palaniappan. “But now the physicians are accepting, the data is supporting, and the FDA is approving…It’s the culmination of things that were all happening disparately, and that’s why this is going to take off in a big way.”
“There are investors willing to deploy their capital into diagnostics,” said Hawkins, whose Truvian is also pursuing a CLIA waiver to get its device into the retail setting. “And I think that’s got a lot to do with mounting evidence, but I also think it has a lot to do with the conversation on the cost of healthcare.”
“More and more people are talking about the fact that you need to be screening, that you need to move to prevention—that’s where the real cost savings comes from, on the preventive side, where you have the ability to screen for things and catch them early enough,” he said.
And as companies produce finer molecular sieves—capable of extracting more data from a single sample—their size will shrink and companies will work to get them in front of as many people as possible.
“When I was eight, I used to watch Star Trek and they had the tricorder, that could do everything from the palm of their hand,” said Gol. “I think that dream is still true, right? I’m just excited to be part of a step on that journey.”

Global Blood Therapeutics, Syros Plan Next-Gen Sickle Cell Disease Treatment

Less than a month after snagging approval for a first-of-its-kind sickle cell disease treatment, Global Blood Therapeutics  (GBT) is already looking at next-generation measures to tackle the disorder, as well as other diseases of the blood such as beta thalassemia.
On Thursday, South San Francisco-based GBT struck a deal with Syros Pharmaceuticals that is worth up to $375 million to discover, develop and commercialize novel therapies for the two types of blood disorders. The two companies will harness the gene control platform developed by Syros to identify therapeutic targets and discover drugs that induce fetal hemoglobin.
The Syros technology modulates the expression of both abnormal and normal genes and allows them to be turned “on, off, up or down,” according to the company’s website. For the purposes of this collaboration, Syros will build upon previous work where it was able to “elucidate mechanisms controlling gamma globin gene expression” and identify “components of LRF (leukemia/lymphoma-related factor) and the NuRD (nucleosome remodeling and histone deacetylation) complex that could serve as potential targets to switch on the gamma globin gene.” The gene is normally silenced shortly after a child is born but the companies believe that if it is turned back on in sickle cell patients, it will induce the production of fetal hemoglobin, which is known to exert protective effects on the red blood cells of patients with both sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia and then mitigate the clinical manifestation of these diseases, the companies said.
At the American Society of Hematology meeting earlier this month, Syros said its discovery of a fetal hemoglobin repressor induced fetal hemoglobin in nearly 100% of cells and increased total fetal hemoglobin levels to 40%, exceeding levels that are associated with a functional cure in SCD patients.
Ted Love, chief executive officer of GBT, said the company believes that Syros’ approach to inducing fetal hemoglobin is “one of the most promising ways to identify the next generation of therapies to treat sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia at a fundamental level – upstream of serious complications such as organ damage, organ failure and early death.” As GBT’s driving focus has been the development of therapies for sickle cell disease, Love said the company will continue to “seek the best scientific approaches” in order to provide additional treatment options for patients.
Sickle cell disease, which affects an estimated 100,000 people in the United States, is caused by a genetic defect in the gene that codes for hemoglobin that causes red blood cells to have a sickle shape. That, in turn, affects how they carry oxygen. The diminished oxygen delivery to tissues and organs can lead to life-threatening complications, including stroke, blood clots, infections and irreversible organ damage.
“We believe it is possible to provide a functional cure for patients with sickle cell disease or beta thalassemia by switching on the gamma globin gene with an oral medicine,” Syros CEO Nancy Simonian said in a statement. “Partnering with GBT, an established leader in sickle cell disease with proven research, development, manufacturing and commercialization capabilities, allows us to expand and accelerate our program, exploring multiple approaches in parallel with the aim of bringing much-needed new therapies to market for patients with sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia as quickly as possible.”
Under terms of the agreement, Syros will receive $20 million in upfront cash. GBT will also provide up to $40 million to fund preclinical research for three years. GBT will receive an option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop, manufacture and commercialize products resulting from the collaboration. If GBT exercises this option, Syros could receive up to $315 million in additional milestones. Syros would also be eligible to receive any royalties from potential commercial sales.