Search This Blog

Thursday, June 3, 2021

Bristol-Myers is sued for $6.4 billion over delayed cancer drug

 Bristol Myers Squibb Co (BMY.N) was sued for $6.4 billion on Thursday for allegedly delaying its Breyanzi cancer drug to avoid payments to shareholders of the former Celgene Corp, which the drugmaker bought in 2019.

According to a complaint in Manhattan federal court, Bristol Myers failed to use contractually required "diligent efforts" to win U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval for the non-Hodgkin lymphoma drug by a Dec. 31, 2020, deadline.

By missing the deadline, Bristol Myers was excused from owing an additional $9 in cash to Celgene shareholders for each share they held, enabling it to acquire Celgene at an "enormous discount" and enjoy a "windfall," the complaint said.

Bristol Myers bought Celgene for $80.3 billion in cash and stock in November 2019. It won FDA approval for Breyanzi, whose chemical name is lisocabtagene maraleucel, on Feb. 5.

The lawsuit was brought by UMB Bank NA, acting as a trustee for Celgene's former shareholders.

"We will not be commenting on pending litigation," Bristol Myers said in a statement.

The $9 per share "milestone" payment had been contingent on New York-based Bristol Myers winning FDA approval by specified deadlines for three drugs that Celgene had been developing.

UMB said Bristol Myers withheld or belatedly submitted critical information to the FDA for Breyanzi's approval, and did not prepare its manufacturing plants for required inspections.

"Other cellular therapies based on similar technology have received FDA approval without the issues and ineptitude that plagued Bristol Myers, and in substantially less time," UMB said.

A lawyer for the Kansas City, Missouri-based bank declined additional comment.

Bristol Myers won FDA approval for the two other Celgene drugs, Zeposia for multiple sclerosis and Abecma to treat multiple myeloma, by the specified deadlines.

The case is UMB Bank NA v Bristol-Myers Squibb Co et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 21-04897.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/lawsuit-says-bristol-myers-avoided-64-bln-payment-by-delaying-cancer-drug-2021-06-03/

Pandemic upside: Flu virus became less diverse, simplifying task of making flu shots

 In the eight years leading up to the Covid-19 pandemic, one of the subtypes of influenza A viruses started acting bizarrely. Flu viruses continuously evolve, to evade the immune defenses humans develop to fend them off. But after 2012, H3N2 started to behave differently.

It was almost as if there was a falling out within a family. The viruses formed into factions — clades, in virologists’ language — drifting further and further apart with each passing year and making the process of choosing the version of H3N2 to include in flu shots an increasingly challenging task.

The greater the genetic distance between the clades, the bigger the cost of making the wrong choice. Vaccine that protects reasonably well against one might perform poorly if the other turned out to be the dominant strain in a given winter. In fact, that’s precisely what happened in the 2017-18 season, when the flu shot failed to protect three-quarters of vaccinated people in the U.S. against the H3N2 strain in circulation.

But an unexpected upside of the Covid-19 pandemic may have solved this problem for us — or at least made flu’s diversity more manageable.

With Covid suppression measures like mask wearing, school closures, and travel restrictions driving flu transmission rates to historically low levels around the world, it appears that one of the H3N2 clades may have disappeared — gone extinct. The same phenomenon may also have occurred with one of the two lineages of influenza B viruses, known as B/Yamagata.

Neither has been spotted in over a year. In fact, March of 2020 was the last time viral sequences from B/Yamagata or the H3N2 clade known as 3c3.A were uploaded into the international databases used to monitor flu virus evolution, Trevor Bedford, a computational biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, told STAT.

If the global pool of flu viruses has truly shrunk to this degree, it would be a welcome outcome, flu experts say, making the twice-a-year selection of viruses to be included in flu vaccines for the Northern and Southern hemispheres much easier work.

“I think it has a decent chance that it’s gone. But the world’s a big place,” Bedford said of the H3N2 clade that may have disappeared.

Florian Krammer, a flu expert at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in Manhattan, has been scouring genetic databases looking for B/Yamagata viruses. He’s hoping the viruses in this lineage are gone for good.

“Just because nobody saw it doesn’t mean it has disappeared completely, right? But it could,” Krammer said.

Flu is complex and a brief primer might be helpful here. There are two key families that cause human disease, influenza A and influenza B. Two subtypes of flu A viruses currently transmit among people, H1N1 and H3N2. Within those two subtypes are subclassifications or clades, with H3N2 viruses having more diversity than H1N1.

Flu B doesn’t have subtypes, but its viruses divide into two “lineages”, B/Victoria and B/Yamagata. In the not-too-distant past only one of the B viruses was included in flu shots every year, but now most brands are quadrivalent — four-in-one shots that include one version each of the H1N1 and H3N2 viruses, and both flu B viruses.

“We work so hard to get quadrivalent vaccines … and now, if really Yamagata has disappeared, then actually trivalent [vaccine] would be okay again,” said Ben Cowling, a flu expert at Hong Kong University. For the record, Cowling is among the skeptics when it comes to the question of whether B/Yamagata is actually gone.

So is Cécile Viboud, a flu epidemiologist at the National Institutes of Health’s Fogerty International Center.

“It’s hard to rule out,” Viboud said, adding these viruses could be circulating at low levels in places that didn’t use the types of non-pharmaceutical interventions like mask wearing and social distancing that other countries have employed to suppress Covid transmission. “The world is a very big place.”

The measures used to slow the spread of Covid-19 have had a dramatic impact on transmission of a number of respiratory viruses. Flu, respiratory syncytial virus — known as RSV — and many of the other bugs that afflict us during cold and flu season have been mercifully absent during the pandemic.

During a typical year, the genetic sequences of about 20,000 flu viruses are logged into GISAID, a repository used by researchers and public health officials to monitor the evolution of influenza and coronaviruses. But in the past year, only 200 were uploaded, Bedford said.

Part of that is likely due to the fact that labs that do viral sequencing are prioritizing work on SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid. But a big factor here is that there is just a lot less flu transmission occurring, around the globe. That has led to a substantial winnowing of the pool of human flu viruses.

“There had been maybe five-ish, six-ish [H3N2] clades circulating and now there’s two or three that made it through that bottleneck,” Bedford said.

Though there’s been little flu illness globally, there are places that have seen outbreaks during the pandemic, he noted, saying China recorded flu B transmission — the Victoria lineage — and West Africa, Bangladesh, and Cambodia had H3N2 activity.

Richard Webby, director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Studies on the Ecology of Influenza in Animals and Birds, cautioned that only a portion of flu viruses ever undergo genetic sequencing, so predictions about which flu viruses may have disappeared that are based on what’s in the databases risk being wrong.

But Webby does believe there has been a large reduction in the diversity of the circulating flu viruses, saying it will be interesting to see how that plays out in coming years.

“Without doubt this is definitely going to change something in terms of the diversity of flu viruses out there. The extent to which it changes and how long it stays changed are the big question marks. But we have never seen this before,” said Webby, whose center is based at St. Jude Children’s Hospital in Memphis.

His bet is that the B/Yamagata viruses aren’t gone, noting the flu B virus lineages sometimes go quiet for a while, only to reappear later.

“But I do think we’re likely to lose a little bit of the H3N2 diversity. That’s a great thing. … Currently when we sit down to make recommendations for vaccine strains, it’s always the headache virus,” Webby said.

“If we have to pick a [subtype] to lose diversity in, that would be the one.”

https://www.statnews.com/2021/06/02/pandemic-upside-flu-virus-became-less-diverse-simplifying-task-of-making-flu-shots/

EU’s COVID jab certificate scheme goes live in seven countries

 The first batch of EU countries have started recognising the vaccination status of travellers using digital vaccine certificates as the bloc moves towards freeing up travel ahead of the summer period.

Germany, Greece, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Croatia and Poland are the first to start using the scheme, which will allow people who have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19, tested negative recently, or recovered from the disease to travel without restriction within the EU.

The document – which is available in digital or paper form – will be “free of charge, secure and accessible to all,” according to the European Commission, and may be scanned at the point of departure or arrival within the EU.

National authorities are in charge of issuing the certificates, which bear a QR code that includes key information including a unique identifier designed to prevent forgery. In the interest of privacy, all data remains on the certificate and isn’t stored or retained when it is scanned in another EU member state.

The commission has set a 1 July deadline for the remaining 20 member states to sign up, after which a phase in period will take place until 12 August.

While not a legal requirement for travel, the aim is for all EU member states to be in a position to accept the certificate by the peak summer holiday season “to help ensure that restrictions currently in place can be lifted in a coordinated manner”.

EU countries are still free to impose their own restrictions on travel, for example if they are concerned about the emergence of new variants.

“The EU Digital COVID Certificate shows the value added of effective e-health solutions for our citizens,” said Stella Kyriakides, the EU commissioner for health and food safety

“EU citizens are looking forward to travelling again, and they want to do so safely,” she added. “Having an EU certificate is a crucial step on the way.”

The UK meanwhile has updated the NHS app (note: not the NHS COVID-19 app used for contact tracing) so that it can be used to prove vaccination status when traveling abroad – but according to media reports has abandoned plans to make certification a requirement of entry to mass events, pubs or shops.

Not all countries will accept the NHS app as proof of vaccination alone however, so people may still have to adhere to other rules when traveling abroad, such as taking a pre-departure test.

https://pharmaphorum.com/news/eus-covid-jab-certificate-scheme-goes-live-in-seven-countries/

Replimune heads for the liver, fails to impress

 Early indications at SITC last year that Replimune’s oncolytic virus approach was working in skin cancer sent the company’s stock up 50%, and further cuts of that data released today point to deepening responses. But the first look at a follow-on CTLA-4-armed project, RP2, combined with Opdivo, seemed to take the shine off the progress.

A further two complete responses were reported with RP1, the company’s lead project, on top of the seven revealed at last October, out of 36 patients treated in the melanoma arm of the Ignyte trial. A very early cut of data on RP2 found 6 partial responses among 27 treated patients, giving an ORR of 22%; it should be remembered that these patients had exhausted all other options.

The company also unveiled plans today to push RP2 and a third project, RP3, into a liver metastasis setting. This was prompted by better than expected responses in a handful of patients whose disease had spread to the organ, persuading the company that the setting was worthy of “aggressive development”, Replimune’s founder and head of research, Rob Coffin, said on an investor call today.

Six patients with liver disease have responded to either RP1 or RP2, three of whom had the oncolytic virus injected into their liver tumour. The remaining three had a liver response despite having a tumour elsewhere injected, supporting the theory that these projects are eliciting a systemic immune response, according to Professor Mark Middleton, head of oncology research at Oxford University and Replimune’s lead investigator.

Of these six patients, two had complete responses, both occurring in cutaneous melanoma, while four partial responses were seen in cutaneous melanoma, uveal melanoma, oesophageal and MSI-high colorectal cancer. Responses were durable, stretching out to almost two years. But no denominators were revealed, so it is unclear whether non-responders with liver metastases have been seen. 

Pushing on

In the coming months Replimune plans to expand enrolment into an ongoing trial of RP2 to include patients with liver metastases of defined tumour types, including GI, lung and breast cancers. Further data in uveal melanoma is of particular interest – should the signal be confirmed here the company plans to move to “registration-directed development”.

For RP3, early clinical work testing its safety when injected straight into the liver will commence, followed by a monotherapy and PD-1 combination trial.

The liver is the most common site of tumour spread, and the presence of liver metastases renders the disease resistant to immunotherapy. According to Replimune this is due to liver-resident macrophages, which ultimately dampen T-cell activation. The company maintains that its oncolytic virus projects can counter this resistance, by boosting T-cell production and reducing apoptosis.

This remains to be proven, of course, and for now Replimune’s main focus is RP1 and RP2 in skin cancer. The first data on RP2 plus Opdivo were also revealed today, and Professor Middleton stressed that this was a very early cut of the data and that the project’s true effectiveness remained hard to assess.

Replimune's data with RP2 + Opdivo
 All tumoursCutaneous melanomaUveal melanomaSarcoma
Number of patients27964
Ongoing PR64*10
Best response SD9322
On study with opportunity for response8232
Current ORR22%44%17%0%
*Two unconfirmed. Source: company presentation.

A 12% dip in Replimune’s share price morning suggests that investors were expecting something more. It is important to remember that this is essentially a salvage setting, and many of the patients had failed anti-PD-1 therapy. The trial is continuing.

A later cut of the ongoing trial of RP1, Ignyte, was perhaps more impressive, with more patients converting to complete responses and durability in some cases approaching two years.

Still, the relatively complex administration of oncolytic viruses has been a major drawback, and is thought likely to restrict their application to easy-to-reach tumours and possibly salvage settings. Indeed, Mr Coffin had founded Biovex, sold to Amgen in 2011, whose oncolytic virus Imlygic has largely remained a niche treatment.

For the negative view to change Replimune needs these data to keep improving, and confirm these very early signals in liver settings.

Melanoma cohort of Ignyte trial - RP1 + Opdivo

Auris Medical pivots to RNA with Trasir Therapeutics buyout

It’s all-change at Auris Medical as it ditches its leaking pipeline, changes it name and its ticker as it picks up an RNA biotech to try to keep going, but in a new guise.

Auris Medical as we know it will become obsolete as it changes its name to Altamira Therapeutics and changes its trading symbol to "CYTO," the word root for cell in ancient Greek, killing off its former "EARS" ticker.

EARS was picked as the company had once been heavily focused on AM-111, a late-stage asset targeting sudden deafness, although this failed a phase 3 in 2017, with further failures in tinnitus also hitting the biotech.

This, along with the rest of its pipeline in eurotology, rhinology and allergology (which presumably includes its early nasal spray work for SARS-CoV-02) is being swept out and put up for sale, including its drugs for vertigo and allergens.

This has all been prompted by the buyout of Tampa, Florida-based Trasir Therapeutics, with the deal made up of 0.77 million common shares as well as the assumption of certain selling shareholders’ cash outlays and future share-based payment contingents.


Auris will tap the little-known, private biotech to fill up its now vacant pipeline with its RNA platform in extrahepatic oligonucleotide delivery. It’s all very early stage, but its so-called OligoPhore platform enables delivery to target tissues outside the liver, “creating the potential for developing RNA-based therapies for a range of indications with substantial unmet need,” the company said.

Preclinical work shows promise, the biotech said, for “several oncology indications” as well as rare diseases, rheumatoid and osteoarthritis and inflammatory pathologies such as atherosclerosis.

Work will first start on AM-401, a preclinical asset, in “oncology or rare disease indication,” with a trial start planned for next year.

It will also tap its new biotech for the delivery of siRNA, mRNA and gene editing constructs and will “seek to leverage the platform’s potential through strategic partnering.”

“Following a thorough review of various strategic options, we are very excited to enter with the Trasir acquisition the field of oligonucleotide delivery, which we believe will provide us with a new range of RNA-based therapeutics with disruptive potential,” said Thomas Meyer, Auris Medical’s founder, chairman and CEO.

“Although we continue to believe that our existing business holds great promise, we acknowledge investors’ preferences for highly focused company strategies. Therefore, we will prepare for its separation either through a divestiture or a spin-off to shareholders within the next 12-18 months. Through the strategic repositioning and transformation of the company, we aim to unlock and create significant shareholder value.”

Auris was up 10% premarket on the news, though it has a market cap of less than $50 million, trading for years at around the $8 a share price, a major slump from the days before 2016 and the first of its ear disorder flops.

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/after-flops-and-setbacks-auris-medical-pivots-to-rna-trasir-therapeutics-buyout

Valneva's not too late in COVID-19 as analysts eye $1.1B in 2022 vaccine sales

 Valneva has yet to successfully usher its inactivated COVID-19 vaccine across the regulatory finish line, but analysts still see reason to bet on the French vaccine specialist.

The biotech's shot could bring in roughly $1.1 billion in 2022 through supply deals and more than $500 million in 2023, Jefferies analysts wrote in a note to clients Tuesday. The vaccine, dubbed VLA2001, is currently in late-stage trials—tested against AstraZeneca's shot—with a readout expected in the third quarter this year. 

Unlike its pandemic competitors, Valneva is the only European-made inactivated, adjuvanted coronavirus candidate that has undergone clinical testing in the region. It will likely be the only, or at least the leading, shot of its type in Europe, the analysts said. 

The vaccine, which incorporates a CpG 1018 adjuvant from Dynavax, could have a safety edge since mRNA shots are still novel technologies and adenovirus vaccines from Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca have been plagued with concerns of rare but serious blood clots, the analysts wrote.


On top of that, Valneva’s shot won’t come with stringent cold-chain requirements and has a longer shelf life than current mRNA options. The Jefferies analysts believe that countries will likely stockpile COVID-19 vaccines “above and beyond what is necessary out of an abundance of caution," and VLA2001 could pose as a viable choice. 

Valneva, a relative unknown in the vaccine race so far, already has a supply agreement with the U.K. worth €1.4 billion ($1.63 billion) for a five-year supply of doses. The deal could eventually bring in 190 million doses by 2025. The company is preparing to deliver 60 million of those shots in the second half of 2021. 

In April, the company said it would no longer focus on striking a supply pact with the EU and would instead turn to individual countries. Germany, France and Sweden are likely candidates looking to buy more doses, Jefferies analysts wrote.

However, if the shot makes it to the market, the vaccine will have to face other well-established Big Pharmas that have accumulated vaccine sales far beyond Jefferies’ predictions for Valneva.

Moderna’s shot in the first quarter alone cashed in $1.73 billion and is expected to bring in $19.2 billion in sales by year-end. Meanwhile, Pfizer is expecting an even bigger payout. It’s vaccine, first to market in the U.S., reeled in $3.4 billion during the first quarter. Pfizer has laid out a $26 billion sales forecast for the full year. 


Those companies have raced to develop booster shots to target troublesome variants of the virus, a lucrative sign for investors who are eyeing pandemic revenue streams for years to come. 

For its part, Valneva is in “a good position to benefit” as a booster shot, the Jefferies analysts argue. The shot is part of a U.K.-government funded clinical trial examining seven different vaccines to determine how effective a booster of each shot is at protecting individuals from the virus, according to the company. Initial results are expected in September. 

https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/it-s-not-too-late-for-valneva-analysts-eye-1-1b-covid-19-vaccine-sales-next-year

Airborne Pathogen Standard Can Protect Us

 Healthcare providers have been at the forefront of many changes to our healthcare systems and society during the pandemic, as they treat COVID-19 patients and face a constant threat of exposure. Personal protective equipment (PPE) has become the norm, and it has undoubtedly kept healthcare workers safer. Now, as the pandemic may be nearing its end in the U.S., the question becomes whether these measures, adopted out of necessity, will persist. Personally, I am worried they will not. Once the pandemic recedes from memory and the impetus for wearing PPE isn't present on a daily basis, I fear these protections will no longer be universally provided to us.

So, how can we ensure that healthcare workers continue to have access to masks and other PPE? The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) should create an airborne pathogen standard.

Throughout the pandemic, we worked to limit the toll this disease took on our country. This work came with significant risk: healthcare workers were three times more likely to be infected with COVID-19 compared to the general public. This high infectivity rate was likely exacerbated by PPE shortages during the initial phases of the pandemic, with many healthcare workers either having inadequate PPE or being forced to reuse their equipment well beyond its intended use. Early on, there were even alarming news stories of hospitals and other healthcare organizations that actually forbade their employees from wearing masks and other PPE.

However, it quickly became obvious that healthcare systems needed to implement new standards. With remarkable speed, wearing masks, eye protection, and gowns became standard practice. CDC developed COVID-19 recommendations for healthcare providers, which stated that providers "should wear well-fitting source control at all times while they are in the healthcare facility." Masks and other protective equipment, while initially in short supply, undoubtedly helped prevent scores of healthcare providers from becoming ill -- or worse -- due to a COVID-19 infection.

Adequate PPE is absolutely necessary to protect healthcare workers from airborne infection. An OSHA airborne pathogen standard is an important step to ensure the PPE shortages and restrictions on mask wearing we witnessed during this pandemic never happen to us again. The CDC issues recommendations, but an OSHA regulation can have real consequences, including loss of certification and significant fines. An OSHA airborne pathogen standard would not only codify best practices for prevention and protection, but it would also place the onus on hospitals and other healthcare employers to ensure they adequately protect their employees in the future.

This wouldn't be the first time OSHA produced workplace standards in response to a significant health event -- precedent already exists. In the early 1990s, OSHA created the Bloodborne Pathogens standard in response to the AIDS epidemic. This standard laid out requirements for employers "to protect workers who are occupationally exposed to blood or other potentially infectious organisms." Among other protections, it requires that gloves are provided to employees, disposable needles are used, and that post-exposure prophylaxis is made available to any employee who is potentially exposed to a bloodborne organism. These practices are now known as "universal precautions," meaning they are used for all patients. Most physicians cannot imagine practicing medicine without them. Yet, if it were not for this OSHA standard, these basic protective measures might not have become universal. OSHA's actions ensured that all employees would enjoy this level of protection.

It's time for OSHA to take action on the important issue we're facing today. At this point, it is not clear when or if COVID-19 is going to completely disappear. It's also unlikely that COVID-19 is the last, or even the worst, airborne pathogen we will face. The coronavirus pandemic, for all of the suffering it has caused, has also helped advance our understanding of best practices for airborne contagion prevention. It has shown us how vulnerable we are to these pathogens when basic, protective measures are lacking. OSHA, please give us this standard; we cannot let all that we have learned from this pandemic go to waste.

Gregory Jasani, MD, is an emergency medicine physician at the University of Maryland Medical Center in Baltimore.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/92899