Search This Blog

Monday, February 22, 2021

Viatris 2021 Financial Guidance Disappoints

  VIATRIS (acquired by Meda AB) Inc. (NASDAQ: VTRS) today announced its 2021 financial guidance and reaffirmed its commitment to rapid de-leveraging, to  enhancing and growing free cash flows, particularly following the phasing out of one-time and other stand up costs, to initiating a dividend, and to delivering total shareholder return (TSR).

2021 Financial Guidance

 

Range

(Billions)

Midpoint

(Billions)

Revenue

$17.2 - $17.8

$17.5

Adjusted EBIDTA (1)

$6.0 - $6.4

$6.2

Free Cash Flow (1)

$2.0 - $2.3

$2.15

(1)  Non-GAAP financial measures. Please see "Non-GAAP Financial Measures" for
additional information.

 

The 2021 Free Cash Flow guidance includes $1.5 billion cash cost to achieve
synergies and other one-time cash costs.

Viatris CEO Michael Goettler said, "The strategic rationale for creating Viatris is as compelling today as when we announced the transaction to create this new company in July 2019. We launched Viatris with a TSR-focused operating model and a commitment to maintaining a strong balance sheet. As we previously stated, our company's priorities in the first three years as we stand up Viatris will be predominately focused on rebalancing the business, generating strong and growing free cash flows, and rapidly de-leveraging.

"We are confident that our financial guidance for 2021 is the right starting point for Viatris and continue to expect 2021 to be our trough year in terms of revenue, adjusted EBITDA and free cash flow, reflecting a balanced view of both near-term tailwinds and headwinds, particularly given the delay in closing of the combination between Mylan and Pfizer's Upjohn business," Goettler said.  

Goettler continued, "Our Global Healthcare Gateway® will fuel our future growth by leveraging our own diverse portfolio and pipeline, as well as those of our current and future partners through our unmatched global infrastructure, and significant scientific, manufacturing and commercial capabilities, all while executing on our mission to empower people worldwide to live healthier at every stage of life. We also look forward to meeting our commitment to provide a longer-term financial outlook in the coming months."

Viatris president Rajiv Malik said, "Since we launched Viatris approximately 90 days ago, we have taken swift and decisive action to rebalance and position our business to succeed and compete in the current environment. This includes our multi-year global restructuring program we expect will accelerate the achievement of our $1 billion in cost synergies in three years, instead of our initial four-year timeframe, and will position us to continue to optimize our unique platform over the long term. We have made significant progress on this program, including taking steps to optimize our commercial and functional infrastructure, consolidate manufacturing sites and implement centers of excellence to enhance innovation and efficiency. We expect this work will enable us to create a more flexible, efficient Viatris better positioned to achieve our long-term objectives. We are looking forward to maximizing our anticipated new product launches, including biosimilars and complex generics, through our enhanced combined global manufacturing and commercial platforms."

https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/viatris-inc-announces-2021-financial-guidance-and-reaffirms-strategic-and-financial-commitments/

Otomy Phase 3 trial misses primary endpoint

  Otonomy, Inc.. (Nasdaq: OTIC), a biopharmaceutical company dedicated to the development of innovative therapeutics for neurotology, today announced that the Phase 3 clinical trial of OTIVIDEX in patients with Ménière’s disease did not achieve the primary endpoint, which was the count of definitive vertigo days (DVD) in Month 3 for OTIVIDEX vs. placebo for the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n = 148; p value = 0.312) using the Negative Binomial Model. This analysis did achieve statistical significance for the per protocol (PP) population (n = 136; p value = 0.031). These results were similar using the Generalized Poisson model (p value = 0.340 for ITT and p value = 0.030 for PP).

“We are disappointed by the top-line results for the primary intent-to-treat population and are undertaking an assessment to understand the difference observed with the per protocol analysis. We thank the many patients, clinical investigators and study site staff who supported this effort,” said David A. Weber, Ph.D., president and CEO of Otonomy. “Our focus turns to the strong pipeline we have built as recently highlighted by the successful clinical trial results for OTO-313 in tinnitus and OTO-413 in hearing loss. OTO-313 and OTO-413 each address a large patient population with significant unmet need and no approved drug therapy. These programs provide an attractive opportunity for the company with clinical readouts anticipated in mid-2022. We expect that our existing cash balance will permit us to achieve these clinical readouts as well as advance our preclinical hearing loss programs including OTO-825, a gene therapy for congenital hearing loss."

The company previously reported a cash balance including cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments totaling $86.3 million as of December 31, 2020, GAAP operating expenses for full year 2020 of $42.6 million and non-GAAP operating expenses, which exclude stock-based compensation, for full year 2020 of $36.5 million.

https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/otonomy-announces-top-line-results-for-the-phase-3-clinical-trial-of-otividex-in-patients-with-meniere-s-disease/

Vaccinex Licenses Anti-CCR8 Antibody to Surface Oncology

 Vaccinex, Inc.  (Nasdaq: VCNX), a clinical-stage biotechnology company pioneering a differentiated approach to treating cancer and neurodegenerative disease through the inhibition of SEMA4D, today announced that Surface Oncology will be exercising its option to license the anti-CCR8 antibody discovered via Vaccinex’s ActivMAb® antibody discovery and novel viral display platform. The antibody, SRF114, is a fully human IgG1 anti-CCR8 antibody that selectively depletes immuno-suppressive tumor T regulatory cells (Tregs) while sparing peripheral Tregs. The terms of agreement with Surface Oncology provided that Surface Oncology pay technology access and licensing fees in addition to research funding, and that Vaccinex will qualify for development milestone payments and royalties.

“We are thrilled to continue building on the recent success of our ActivMAb platform with the announcement of our licensing deal with Surface Oncology,” said Ernest Smith, chief scientific officer of Vaccinex. “The presence of Treg in human tumors is associated with resistance to immunotherapy and blocking CCR8 has been demonstrated to potentiate inhibition of tumor growth in animal studies. Data presented at SITC 2020 demonstrated that SRF114 specifically binds to human CCR8 and induces Treg destruction through antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. We are pleased to have played a part in the development of this promising drug candidate and look forward to following continuing development of SRF114 and further interactions with Surface Oncology.”

https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/vaccinex-announces-licensing-of-anti-ccr8-antibody-to-surface-oncologyantibody-discovered-via-vaccinex-s-activmab-antibody-discovery-platform/

Cassava Sciences: Positive End-of-Phase 2 FDA Meet, Outlines Pivotal Phase 3 for Alzheimer’s Med

 Cassava Sciences Inc., (Nasdaq: SAVA), a biotechnology company developing product candidates for Alzheimer’s disease, today announced the successful completion of an End-of-Phase 2 (EOP2) meeting with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for simufilam, its lead drug candidate for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Official EOP2 meeting minutes indicate FDA and Cassava Sciences agree on key elements of a pivotal Phase 3 clinical program in support of a New Drug Application (NDA) filing for simufilam in Alzheimer’s disease. Agreements reached during the EOP2 meeting show a clear path forward for advancing simufilam into Phase 3 studies in the second half of 2021.

“For over 10 years we’ve been doing basic research and early drug development with simufilam,” said Remi Barbier, President & CEO. “We are excited to finally advance simufilam into pivotal Phase 3 clinical studies in people with Alzheimer’s disease. We believe the underlying science is solid, the drug appears safe and the clinical roadmap makes sense. We’ve crossed the Rubicon.”

“We appreciate the valuable guidance and flexibility FDA has provided,” added Jim Kupiec, MD, Cassava Sciences’ Chief Clinical Development Officer. “We look forward to continuing a collaborative dialogue throughout the pivotal Phase 3 clinical development program.”

Simufilam is a novel drug, discovered at Cassava Sciences, that targets both neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration. The EOP2 meeting discussion was supported by years of scientific and clinical data, including positive results from a previously completed Phase 2 clinical program with simufilam in Alzheimer’s disease. In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 2b study, simufilam demonstrated robust effects on primary and secondary outcome measures, with no safety issues. Recently, the Company announced that simufilam improved cognition in subjects with Alzheimer’s disease in a 6-month interim analysis of an open-label study, with no safety issues.

The EOP2 meeting took place mid-January. FDA attendees included Robert Temple, MD, Deputy Center Director for Clinical Science and Senior Advisor in the Office of New Drugs; Billy Dunn, MD, Director, Office of Neuroscience; Eric Bastings, MD, Director, Division of Neurology, and others.

Official meeting minutes confirm that Cassava Sciences and FDA are aligned on key elements of a Phase 3 clinical program for simufilam. FDA has agreed that the completed Phase 2 program, together with an upcoming and well-defined Phase 3 clinical program, are sufficient to show evidence of clinical efficacy for simufilam in Alzheimer’s disease. There is also agreement that the use of separate clinical scales to assess cognition (ADAS-cog1) and function (ADCS-ADL2) are appropriate co-primary endpoints of efficacy. A clinical scale that combines cognition and function, such as iADRS3, is a secondary efficacy endpoint.

Cassava Sciences’ pivotal Phase 3 clinical program consists of two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies, each described below.

Cassava Sciences’ first Phase 3 study is designed to evaluate disease-modifying effects of simufilam in Alzheimer’s disease. The goal is to demonstrate a slower rate of decline in cognition and health function in subjects treated with simufilam compared to placebo.

https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/cassava-sciences-announces-positive-end-of-phase-2-meeting-with-fda-and-outlines-pivotal-phase-3-program-for-simufilam-in-alzheimer-s-disease/

Prelim Data Shows Single Pfizer, AstraZeneca Shot Significantly Cuts Hospitalization Risk

 Preliminary data from Scotland showed a single shot of Covid-19 vaccines developed by Pfizer Inc. and AstraZeneca PLC substantially reduced the risk of hospitalization with the disease.

A study published online reported that the risk of hospitalization with Covid-19 among those vaccinated with the Pfizer shot was 85% lower than unvaccinated individuals between 28 and 34 days after injection. There were 94% fewer hospitalizations among those vaccinated with the AstraZeneca shot than among those unvaccinated.

The findings, which haven't yet been peer-reviewed, add to a growing body of international evidence that vaccines have a significant effect on the severity of disease.

The Scottish study examined health records associated with 5.4 million people, making it one of the largest such studies to date.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/PFIZER-INC-23365019/news/Pfizer-Preliminary-Data-Shows-Single-Pfizer-AstraZeneca-Shot-Significantly-Lowers-Risk-of-Hospita-32498603/

Some Covid-19 Tests Can Flag a Key Variant

 The highly transmissible Covid-19 virus variant that first emerged in the U.K. can partially evade a commonly used coronavirus test. Some health authorities are using that fact to their advantage.

As more-transmissible variants emerge as a concern in the fight against the virus, the vast majority of Covid-19 diagnostic tests haven't been affected. But for a handful, including one from diagnostics giant Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., a section of the test can't pick up on variants including the U.K. variant that have a specific mutation, the company, laboratories and health officials who have processed its tests said.

Yet the other parts of the tests still work. So if a test comes up positive for Covid-19 but that portion of the test fails, that could indicate that the samples contain the U.K. variant. Some laboratories are exploiting the bug to more quickly find cases that might be caused by the fast-spreading variant.

"It's actually been a benefit for public health to be able to monitor," Michael Mina, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said at an online event last week. "There was a silver lining there."

The tests in question are PCR tests: molecular tests that search for specific portions of the virus's genetic code and amplify them. They are often performed in a lab. The large majority of Covid-19 diagnostic tests, including both molecular and rapid-antigen tests, are able to flag known Covid-19 virus variants as a positive test result.

When laboratories flag the mixed test results from those few PCR tests, researchers can use a technique called genome sequencing to determine which variant has been found. Public-health authorities say more-widespread viral sequencing and better genomic surveillance are necessary to track variants circulating around the globe.

Viruses mutate constantly as they replicate and spread. Most changes don't alter their core characteristics, but some can impact their ability to spread or the severity of disease they cause. Recent variants from the U.K., South Africa and Brazil have raised concerns among scientists because they appear to be more transmissible; vaccines and treatments might be less effective against the variant from South Africa, early research suggests.

Scientists say the U.S. doesn't have a clear picture of how widespread Covid-19 variants are in the country. The country's genomic surveillance system is improving but still trails behind that of the U.K. More than 1,500 cases caused by the U.K. variant, called B.1.1.7, have been identified across 42 states. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates the fast-moving variant could become the dominant one in the country in March.

Just as the virus's mutations threaten to blunt the effectiveness of vaccines and therapies, they also have the potential to diminish the accuracy of Covid-19 tests. The variant discovered in the U.K., for example, has several mutations on what is known as the spike protein, which can affect the efficacy of tests that search for that part of the virus or viral genome, health authorities say.

Federal officials have said the CDC, the Food and Drug Administration and manufacturers are evaluating how authorized tests hold up against the new variants. The FDA intends to notify healthcare providers and the public if any new information becomes available, an agency spokeswoman said.

The impact on diagnostic testing so far appears to be minimal, in part because most available Covid-19 tests don't search for that part of the virus.

Of 246 FDA-authorized tests that search for the virus's genetic material, 85% don't target the spike gene, according to an analysis by researchers at Johns Hopkins University. Most rapid-antigen tests, which search for pieces of viral protein, hunt for the nucleocapsid protein, not the spike protein.

"Most diagnostic tests will still be fine because they're not looking for the place that mutations have been found," said Gigi Kwik Gronvall, an immunologist and senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

Among tests that do search for the spike gene, many look for other parts of the virus's genome as well, making them more robust. Manufacturers design many molecular tests to look for more than one part of a virus's genome in part to withstand such mutations.

One of the tests, Thermo Fisher's TaqPath Combo Kit, looks for three targets including the spike gene. The part of the test that searches for the spike gene fails to pick up some coronavirus samples, including the B.1.1.7 variant, a phenomenon dubbed the "S-gene dropout" by some health authorities. The other two targets are able to detect the variants.

"You only need two of the three to call it a positive test," Kimberly Hanson, chief of clinical microbiology at ARUP Laboratories in Salt Lake City, said at a media briefing last month. Molecular tests that fail to identify the spike gene but pick up the other pieces of the virus's genetic code might be flagging cases caused by the B.1.1.7 variant, she said.

As of Feb. 8, ARUP Laboratories, a national laboratory affiliated with the University of Utah, has screened more than 77,000 Thermo Fisher test results and found roughly 400 instances of the S-gene dropout. The company had performed whole-genome sequencing on 150 of them and found four cases of the B.1.1.7 variant from states including Utah.

An S-gene dropout isn't always due to the U.K. variant; it could result from another variant with related mutations, infectious disease experts say. Whole-genome sequencing is required to make the distinction.

Still, laboratories and health officials have found cases caused by the variant through the S-gene dropout in states including Colorado, Minnesota and Washington. Researchers in the U.K. also started following S-gene dropout rates to track the spread of B.1.1.7 when it was first detected there last fall.

Thermo Fisher first received reports of such cases from customers in the U.K. about the failure in September and October and started receiving reports from the U.S. in December, said Mark Stevenson, the company's chief operating officer and executive vice president. Thermo Fisher has developed a software update that can help laboratories flag dropouts more easily, he said, as well as a new test that can identify specific mutations related to key variants.

Helix OpCo LLC, a genomic-sequencing company, makes a Covid-19 test that also exhibits S-gene dropout. That enabled the company "to have an earlier detection [of the B.1.1.7 variant] than if we were randomly sampling throughout the country," said James Lu, co-founder and president at Helix.

The S-gene dropout can also sometimes be a good proxy for where and how quickly the variant is spreading, Dr. Lu said. Helix, which recently partnered with the CDC to scale-up Covid-19 surveillance in the U.S., is following the rate at which tests produce the dropout to help track the variant in California and Florida, along with genomic sequencing.

Dr. Lu and other health authorities say exploiting the S-gene dropout isn't enough to track all of the viral variants circulating in the U.S., and they are pushing for a broader genomic-surveillance system. The Biden administration on Wednesday said the CDC will invest nearly $200 million to scale up genetic sequencing of the virus to track emerging variants.

"The focus needs to be larger than the U.K. variant," said Frederick Nolte, Covid-19 response steering committee chairman at the Association for Molecular Pathology.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/THERMO-FISHER-SCIENTIFIC-14623/news/Thermo-Fisher-Scientific-How-Some-Covid-19-Tests-Can-Flag-a-Key-Variant-32505411/

Why this week's FDA meeting on J&J's coronavirus vaccine will be important

 This Friday, a group of vaccine and infectious disease experts will assemble virtually to discuss whether the Food and Drug Administration should clear Johnson & Johnson's coronavirus vaccine for emergency use.

The meeting, convened by the FDA, is likely one of the last steps in the agency's review of J&J's shot. The regulator held similar meetings to review study results from Pfizer and Moderna and, each time, authorized the companies' vaccines the very next day.

The advisers are expected to support emergency use of J&J's vaccine, as they did for Pfizer's and Moderna's. But Friday's meeting will be important viewing nonetheless, as the experts are likely to debate emerging issues like protection against new virus variants. The meeting will be broadcast through an FDA conference system as well as on Youtube. BioPharma Dive will be covering live.

Here's what to watch for:

More details on the effectiveness of J&J's vaccine

The global effort to beat back the pandemic got a major lift last month, when J&J announced its vaccine prevented COVID-19 in a study of nearly 44,000 volunteers.

Overall, results showed a single shot was 66% effective in protecting participants from moderate or severe coronavirus disease — lower than the rates reported for Pfizer's and Moderna's vaccine but still well above the bar set by regulators. The good news was tempered, however, by signs of weakened vaccine potency against the coronavirus variant known as B.1.351 and first detected in South Africa.

As is typical for public company disclosures, J&J's announcement came in the form of a press release, highlighting key findings but revealing few other details.

Both the drugmaker and FDA will share much more data from the trial in documents usually published two days ahead of advisory committee meetings. Particularly important will be specific breakdowns of the number of COVID-19 cases in the vaccine and placebo groups — numbers used to calculate the shot's efficacy.

Friday's meeting could also shed light on how well J&J's vaccine protected against more mild disease, as well as the moderate-to-severe COVID-19 targeted by the study.

A window into the FDA's view on vaccine protection against variants

When the FDA reviewed Pfizer and Moderna's vaccines last year, its scientists were only evaluating how those shots performed against the original version of the coronavirus. The pandemic has shifted since then, with the emergence of viral variants that have spread across the world and appear to weaken the strength of multiple vaccines.

As a result, understanding exactly how variants impact protection has become an important task, as has developing a regulatory framework to update vaccines, if necessary. Friday's meeting on J&J's vaccine should provide the most comprehensive look to date at how the agency views both issues.

J&J has the largest amount of efficacy data against variants of any vaccine developer, giving the agency and outside experts a chance to scrutinize the vaccine's protective effects against different strains. The regulator could also seek experts' advice on how to test updated vaccines specifically tailored to variants. The FDA is in the process of preparing guidelines, potentially making the meeting a preview of the agency's thinking.

An update on J&J's expected vaccine supply

J&J's vaccine has two key advantages over Moderna's and Pfizer's: doses can be shipped and stored at refrigerator temperatures, rather than ultra-cold conditions; and only one shot is required instead of two. Those attributes could make J&J's vaccine a more efficient way to immunize a greater number of people, but only if there are enough doses to do so.

Unfortunately, that likely won't be the case immediately. News reports have indicated that production was delayed, causing J&J to fall behind a delivery schedule the company outlined when the U.S. pre-ordered 100 million doses last year. Last week, Jeffrey Zients, the White House's Coronavirus Response Coordinator, said only a "few million" doses will be available upon FDA authorization and that the government is working with the company to speed deliveries.

More details on those discussions — and the status of J&J's vaccine supply — could come Friday, giving a more accurate picture of what the U.S.'s supply will look like over the next several months. Though the U.S. has now ordered enough of Pfizer and Moderna's shots to fully vaccinate 300 million Americans, most of those doses are due to be delivered between April and June.

J&J has promised to deliver the 100 million doses ordered by the U.S. by the end of June.

Comparison between two types of vaccine technology

Moderna's and Pfizer's vaccines each rely on the same messenger RNA technology to train the immune system to repel the coronavirus. And both were about 95% effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 in clinical testing, raising expectations that other shots might be similarly potent.

That hasn't quite happened. While multiple shots using different, more established technologies — including J&J's vaccine — have proven highly effective, they haven't matched the bar set by Moderna and Pfizer. And that raises questions for the agency and outside experts to answer: Are mRNA vaccines superior, or were they fortunate to be tested earlier, before the spread of more transmissible variants?

J&J has argued the latter and highlighted its shot's near-complete protection against severe COVID-19 and hospitalizations, a significant finding that's now consistent across several vaccines. That will be an important message for regulators to emphasize and for convincing people J&J's shot is just as important to get as any other.

Other comparisons between the shots will be much more difficult to answer, especially as available efficacy data is limited to three to six months' worth.

Any points of debate that emerge between committee experts

The last two advisory committee meetings resulted in overwhelmingly positive votes in support of FDA authorization for first Pfizer and BioNTech's vaccine, and then Moderna's.

J&J's shot is expected to receive similarly positive backing. More vaccine doses are desperately needed and J&J has positive results from a well-run and large clinical trial.

But there's much for the panel's experts to discuss, not least of which will be the shot's comparatively lesser efficacy than Pfizer's and Moderna's vaccines. Committee members may also debate differences between how J&J counted cases of COVID-19 in its trial and how Pfizer and Moderna did.

J&J's vaccine was tested as one dose, a major difference from the two-dose regimens of Pfizer's and Moderna's. While data on long-term efficacy isn't available, durability of protection could be another issue raised on Friday.

At their first meeting, experts disagreed on whether Pfizer's vaccine should be authorized in 16- and 17-year olds, while the second featured lots of back-and-forth over whether study participants who received placebo should be quickly offered the vaccine.

Both meetings also had discussions about rare adverse events, such as allergic reactions, that led the FDA to put warnings on labels of both shots. J&J's briefing documents could detail other rare, yet noteworthy adverse events, such as the unspecified "serious medical event" that briefly halted testing last year but wasn't deemed related to vaccination.

https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/johnson-johnson-coronavirus-vaccine-fda-advisory-meeting/595366/