Search This Blog

Tuesday, November 2, 2021

Pfizer Vaccine Trial Had Major Flaws, Whistleblower Tells Peer-Reviewed Journal

 A whistleblower involved in Pfizer's pivotal phase III Covid-19 vaccine trial has leaked evidence to a notable peer-reviewed medical publication that poor practices at the contract research company she worked for raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight.

Brook Jackson, a now-fired regional director at Ventavia Research Group, revealed to The BMJ that vaccine trials at several sites in Texas last year had major problems - including falsified data, broke fundamental rules, and were 'slow' to report adverse reactions.

When she notified superiors of the issues she found, they fired her.

A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding. After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brook Jackson, emailed a complaint to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Ventavia fired her later the same day. Jackson has provided The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails. -The BMJ

Poor laboratory management

Jackson, a trained clinical trial auditor with more than 15 years' experience, says she repeatedly warned her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns, and data integrity issues. After she was ignored, she started documenting problems with the camera on her mobile phone.

One photo, provided to The BMJ, showed needles discarded in a plastic biohazard bag instead of a sharps container box. Another showed vaccine packaging materials with trial participants’ identification numbers written on them left out in the open, potentially unblinding participants. Ventavia executives later questioned Jackson for taking the photos.

The unblinding was potentially far more severe as well. Per the trial's design, unblinded staff prepared and administered either Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccine or a placebo. This was done to preserve the blinding of trial participants and other staff - including the principal investigator. At Ventavia, however, Jackson says that drug assignments were left in participants' charts and accessible to blinded personnel. The breach was corrected last September, two months into the trial at which point there were around 1,000 participants already enrolled.

Jackson recorded a September 2020 meeting with two Ventavia directors, at which an executive can be heard saying that the company couldn't quantify the types and number of errors with their testing.

"In my mind, it's something new every day," they said, adding "We know that it's significant."

According to the report, Ventavia also failed to keep up with data entry - as a Sept. 2020 email from Pfizer partner ICON reveals.

"The expectation for this study is that all queries are addressed within 24hrs.” ICON then highlighted over 100 outstanding queries older than three days in yellow. Examples included two individuals for which “Subject has reported with Severe symptoms/reactions … Per protocol, subjects experiencing Grade 3 local reactions should be contacted. Please confirm if an UNPLANNED CONTACT was made and update the corresponding form as appropriate.” According to the trial protocol a telephone contact should have occurred “to ascertain further details and determine whether a site visit is clinically indicated.”

FDA Inspection woes

Other documents provided to The BMJ reveal that Ventavia officials were worried about three employees . In an email in early August 2020, an executive identified three site staff members with whom they need to "Go over e-diary issue/falsifying data, etc."

One of the employees was "verbally counseled for changing data and not noting late entry," a note reveals.

During the September meeting, Ventavia executives and Jackson discussed the potential for the FDA to show up for an inspection. On former Ventavia employee told The BMJ that the company was petrified over the potential for an FDA audit, and were in fact expecting one over the Pfizer vaccine trial.

"People working in clinical research are terrified of FDA audits," Jill Fisher told the journal, adding however that the agency rarely does anything except review paperwork - usually months after a trial is over. "I don’t know why they’re so afraid of them," she added - saying that she was surprised that the agency failed to inspect Ventavia following an employee complaint.

"You would think if there’s a specific and credible complaint that they would have to investigate that."

FDA notified

Jackson sent a Sept. 25 email to the FDA in which she wrote that Ventavia had enrolled over 1,000 participants at three sites, out of the full trial's 44,000 participants across 153 sites which included various academic institutions and commercial companies. She raised concerns over issues she had witnessed, including:

  • Participants placed in a hallway after injection and not being monitored by clinical staff

  • Lack of timely follow-up of patients who experienced adverse events

  • Protocol deviations not being reported

  • Vaccines not being stored at proper temperatures

  • Mislabelled laboratory specimens, and

  • Targeting of Ventavia staff for reporting these types of problems.

Hours later, the FDA emailed her back, thanking her for her input but notifying her that they would not comment on any investigation which may result.

That said, in August of this year, the FDA published a summary of its inspections of Pfizer's pivotal phase III trial. They looked at just nine out of the trial's 153 sites, and did not look at any of Ventavia's operations. Further, no inspections were conducted following the December 2020 emergency authorization of the vaccine.

Other employees corroborate Jackson's complaints

Two former Ventavia employees spoke with The BMJ anonymously, and confirmed 'broad aspects' of Jackson's account.

One said that she had worked on over four dozen clinical trials in her career, including many large trials, but had never experienced such a “helter skelter” work environment as with Ventavia on Pfizer’s trial.

I’ve never had to do what they were asking me to do, ever,” she told The BMJ. “It just seemed like something a little different from normal—the things that were allowed and expected.

She added that during her time at Ventavia the company expected a federal audit but that this never came.

After Jackson left the company problems persisted at Ventavia, this employee said. In several cases Ventavia lacked enough employees to swab all trial participants who reported covid-like symptoms, to test for infection. Laboratory confirmed symptomatic covid-19 was the trial’s primary endpoint, the employee noted. (An FDA review memorandum released in August this year states that across the full trial swabs were not taken from 477 people with suspected cases of symptomatic covid-19.)

I don’t think it was good clean data,” the employee said of the data Ventavia generated for the Pfizer trial. “It’s a crazy mess.” -The BMJ

The second employee told The BMJ that working at Ventavia was unlike any environment she had experienced in 20 years of research.

Since her firing, Jackson has reconnected with several Ventavia employees who either left or were fired themselves. One of them sent her a text message, which reads "everything that you complained about was spot on."

Meanwhile, since Jackson reported issues with Ventavia to the FDA in September 2020, Pfizer has contracted with the company for four other vaccine clinical trials.

One has to wonder - if the FDA is auditing less than 10% of trials, how many more potential whistleblowers could there be?

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/falsified-data-pfizer-vaccine-trial-had-major-flaws-whistleblower-tells-peer-reviewed

Integra LifeSciences Report Upbeat Q3 Results; Raises Full-year Earnings Outlook

 Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation (IART) on Tuesday reported higher earnings in the third quarter driven by strength across most of its product portfolio. The company also raised its full-year adjusted earnings outlook, better than analysts' view.

Integra reported net income of $43.2 million, or $0.51 per share, in the third quarter, compared with $32.3 million, or $0.38 per share, in the prior year.

Excluding items, earnings of $73.1 million or $0.86 per share beat the average estimate of thirteen analysts polled by Thomson Reuter at $0.72 per hare.

Revenue for the quarter increased 4.5% year-over-year to $386.9 million. The consensus estimate was for $384.58 million.

Further, the company has raised its full-year adjusted earnings per share outlook to the range of $3.16 to $3.20 from $2.98 to $3.05. The consensus estimate stands at $3.02 per share.

Full-year revenue is expected in the range of $1.54 billion- $1.55 billion. Analysts see revenue of $1.54 billion for the period.

Looking forward to the the fourth quarter, Integra expects revenue of $403 million and adjusted earnings per share to be in a range of $0.82 to $0.86.

Analysts expect the company to report earnings of $0.81 per hare on revenue of $409.65 million in the fourth quarter.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/integra-lifesciences-report-upbeat-q3-results-raises-full-year-earnings-outlook-2021-11-02

Lilly pulls COVID-19 treatment from EU review

 Eli Lilly has retracted a request for European Union approval of its antibody-based treatment for COVID-19, citing a lack of demand from EU member states as the bloc focuses on other suppliers.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) said on Tuesday it had ended its rolling review of a cocktail of two monoclonal antibodies known as etesevimab and bamlanivimab after the U.S.-based drugmaker withdrew from the process https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-ends-rolling-review-antibodies-bamlanivimab-etesevimab-covid-19-following-withdrawal-lilly.

Lilly's letter https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/withdrawal-letter/withdrawal-letter-bamlanivimab-etesevimab_.pdf to the regulator, dated Oct. 29, said that lack of demand in the trading bloc did not justify submitting further required data on its manufacturing plan.

"At this point Lilly is not in a position to generate the additional data required by the CHMP (EMA's human medicines committee) to progress to a formal marketing authorization application," the company said.

The news comes on the day that the U.S. government agreed to buy 614,000 additional doses of Lilly's antibody combo for $1.29 billion, which follows the purchase of 388,000 doses of etesevimab in September to supplement stocks of bamlanivimab it had previously bought.

The United States had already given emergency approval for the drug cocktail for patients at an early stage of the disease to prevent deterioration and for some people who have been exposed to the virus.

Even though the EU in September procured 220,000 courses of bamlanivimab and etesevimab, contingent on approval, the EU Commission in mid-October omitted the combination from a list https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_5366 of 10 treatments most promising for COVID-19.

The EU in March signed a deal with Roche for an antibody cocktail developed with Regeneron, and in July struck another deal for GlaxoSmithKline and Vir's antibody drug.

Federal Judge Blocks Hospital From Putting Unvaccinated Workers On Unpaid Leave

 by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge temporarily blocked an Illinois hospital system from allegedly putting workers with religious exemptions on unpaid leave.

In late October, several employees at the Chicago-area NorthShore filed a legal complaint against the company, arguing that the firm’s vaccine mandate discriminated against them by forcing them to decide between a vaccine and their jobs.

Liberty Counsel, which is representing the 14 health care workers, said in an emailed statement last week that the “plaintiffs have shared these religious beliefs, and others, with NorthShore, and have asked NorthShore for exemption and reasonable accommodation for these beliefs, but NorthShore has unlawfully and callously refused.”

U.S. District Judge John Kness on Friday issued a temporary restraining order against the hospital system.

“They can’t be fired and they can’t be placed on what is effectively, in my mind, unpaid leave,” Kness said during a hearing on the lawsuit, reported the Chicago Tribune.

NorthShore is “going to have to keep paying them. If you wish to require them to show up to work and use [personal protective equipment] and go through testing because you need the help and you don’t want to pay them to be off site, that’s up to the hospital,” he added.

Liberty Counsel said that more than a week ago, “NorthShore had already started purging those employees with sincere religious objections to its ‘Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination Policy'” and removed many employees with religious exemptions from its November work schedule. That included staff members with appeals that were pending, Liberty Counsel said.

Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines say that employees may ask to be exempted from vaccine requirements due to religious or medical reasons. However, workplaces do not necessarily have to grant the exemptions under certain circumstances, the agency’s guidance adds.

Horatio Mihet, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, told the Chicago Tribune that unvaccinated workers can still work there while wearing personal protective equipment and getting weekly testing.

NorthShore previously told The Epoch Times that it understands “that getting vaccinated may be a difficult decision for some of our team members” and values “their committed service and respect their beliefs.” On Monday, NorthShore didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

“We must prioritize the safety of our patients and team members in support of our broader mission,” the hospital system said.

NorthShore, in a statement to local media last week, disputed several claims in the lawsuit and had “considered each request based on multiple criteria” on exemptions.

PDUFA Date Extended for Legend/Janssen Multiple Myeloma Drug

 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has extended Legend Biotech Corporation's Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) target date for the drug it is developing to treat relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. 

Legend Biotech's ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is a BCMA-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy that it is creating with partner Janssen Biotech. It is indicated for adults diagnosed with multiple myeloma. 

With the FDA's approval, the drug makers have until February 28, 2022 to review their findings and analytical processes. The PDUFA is a law that allows the FDA to collect fees from the drug makers as part of their application for approval. 

In February 2019, Cita-cel was granted Orphan Drug Designation, which progressed to a Breakthrough Therapy Designation by December of the same year. It was also at this time when its Biologics License Application was submitted. In May 2021, it was accepted under Priority Review. Legend Biotech and Janssen entered an exclusive collaboration deal to develop and commercialize the drug in 2017. 

"We are working closely with Janssen and the FDA to facilitate an efficient and thorough review of the BLA for cilta-cel. We remain confident that cilta-cel has shown great promise in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, and we are focused on making this therapy available to them in the U.S. as soon as possible," said Ying Huang, Ph.D., chief executive officer and chief financial officer of Legend Biotech, in a statement. 

The BLA is based on results from the CARTITUDE-1 Phase IB/2 trial, which achieved the primary endpoint of safety and found the recommended Phase II dose in Phase IB and objective response rate (ORR) in Phase II. The original PDUFA target was November 29, 2021.

Janssen received word of the FDA's extension in October and then met with the FDA with Legend Biotech on November 1 to discuss the conditions of the change. It appears that the drug remains on schedule in February, as no additional clinical data have been requested. 

Multiple myeloma is an incurable type of blood cancer that begins in the bone marrow and is characterized by an overproduction of plasma cells. Current treatment interventions are able to place a patient in remission, but this is highly prone to relapse. 

Relapsed multiple myeloma is one that comes back after a year since an initial partial or total remission, while refractory multiple myeloma happens when a patient does not respond to treatment within 60 days from therapy. Prognosis is poor for those who have this disease.

Applications seeking the approval of cilta-cel are currently being reviewed by health authorities worldwide, including the U.S. FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

https://www.biospace.com/article/legend-biotech-janssen-multiple-myeloma-drug-candidate-gets-fda-extension/

Novartis Links with UK's Dunad in $1.3 Billion Protein Degradation Deal

 Novartis has forged a collaboration with U.K.-startup Dunad Therapeutics to develop next-generation targeted protein-degradation therapies in a deal valued at up to $1.3 billion.

Dunad, which is based in Cambridge, England, emerged from stealth mode in March of this year, backed by the financial strength of Epidarex Capital. Dunad’s small molecule platform prompts the degradation of disease-causing proteins by modifying the target using mono-valent small molecules. Novartis is banking on Dunad’s claims that its novel approach is “fully tuneable to be exquisitely selective and underpinned by a target-class agnostic mechanism of action that is distinct from other targeted protein degradation technologies.” The small U.K. company believes its platform has the potential to develop orally bioavailable and CNS-accessible degrader therapeutics that can “significantly expand the frontiers of protein degradation targets.”

With Novartis, Dunad will apply its platform to generate novel covalent and targeted protein-degrading small molecule drugs focusing on up to four drug targets. Dunad will be responsible for the development of the assets until lead optimization. For its part, Novartis will contribute target and ligand knowledge. The Swiss pharma giant will also provide Dunad with access to unique assays and models and provide full funding for the project. Novartis will have an exclusive option to develop and commercialize any products that result from the agreement.

Under the terms of the deal, Novartis will provide Dunad with $24 million in an upfront payment and equity investment. Dunad will also be eligible for milestone payments that could climb to as much as $1.3 billion.

The protein degradation field has deepened with more companies investing resources into this approach. Companies like PhoreMost and Kymera Therapeutics have built a pipeline around the field. Earlier this year, Pfizer struck a $1 billion deal with Connecticut-based Arvinas to develop and commercialize its PROTAC estrogen receptor protein degrader. With the Dunad deal, Novartis will carve out its own stake with the intriguing modality.

Patrick Gunning, Ph.D., co-founder and acting chief executive officer and chief scientific officer of Dunad, expressed his excitement about the partnership with Novartis.

“This deal highlights the clear benefits our platform promises for the development of next-generation targeted protein degrader therapeutics. We are confident that with our approach of inducing degradation via direct modulation of target proteins with mono-valent small molecules, we can significantly expand the boundaries of targeted protein degraders as a therapeutic modality,” Gunning said in a statement.

Diana Kraskouskaya, Ph.D., co-founder and chief operating officer of Dunad, noted that the collaboration with Novartis is a significant milestone for the young company. She said the partnership will allow the company to “rapidly expand the impact of our platform technology to additional target classes and therapeutic areas, beyond Dunad’s own internal target pipeline.” Kraskouskaya added that Dunad is committed to advancing its pipeline to tackle previously intractable targets.

https://www.biospace.com/article/novartis-strikes-1-3-billion-deal-with-protein-degradation-startup-dunad-therapeutics/

Moderna finally cracks into gene editing with Metagenomi pact

 We finally know who Moderna has been courting behind the scenes to make the big jump into gene editing. The famed biotech has signed a research partnership with CRISPR gene editing company Metagenomi.

Both parties are keeping mum on a lot of the details. We don’t know what indications they’ll go after, how many targets they will develop, how much Moderna will put up for research funding, how much was paid upfront, what the milestone or royalty payments will end up being down the line or how much of an equity investment Moderna made through the transaction.

We do know that the partnership will involve in vivo treatment options for serious genetic diseases. Metagenomi will offer up access to its gene editing tools while Moderna will bring the expertise in mRNA and lipid nanoparticle delivery technologies.

Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel made waves in August when he told investors during second-quarter earnings that the company planned to finally spend some of its billions in COVID-19 vaccine revenue on a gene editing deal of some kind. President Stephen Hoge further clarified that Moderna is interested in improving delivery mechanisms in gene editing with its mRNA technology.

So how did Metagenomi rise to the top in the field of available gene editing companies?

Turns out the small biotech had an in with Eric Huang, Ph.D., the general manager and chief scientific officer of Moderna Genomics; he serves on Metagenomi’s science advisory board.

“When they presented the data to me, I just found it irresistible,” Huang said. “And then once Moderna decided to invest in genomic medicine in general, I brought this opportunity to Stephane.”

He jokingly said there was “no bias” in the selection, that of course Moderna conducted thorough due diligence. He admits he’ll likely need to resign the SAB position now that the companies are tied up. Huang said the two companies have complementary cultures, and a desire to “dream big—too big, but do good science.”

Huang would not disclose financial details either but called the partnership “very significant” in terms of cash and research funding as well as the equity investment.

“We would love to be part of their success,” Huang said of Metagenomi. “We're gonna be tied at the hip for a while.”

Metagenomi’s discovery platform finds DNA from natural samples that can be sequenced to create new tools for gene editing. Drug candidates are then identified using AI. The small biotech is backed by Bayer, which signed on to an initial $65 million funding round at the end of 2020. That round was pushed up to $75 million in April with the addition of new investment from VC shop RA Capital.

Metagenomi CEO Brian Thomas called the Moderna partnership a natural one and said his company has benefited from Huang’s input over the past three years.

“As we started to grow closer in our discussions about the broad toolbox that Metagenomi is building, it became really clear that the two companies' missions were starting to align,” Thomas said.

This is Metagenomi's first partnership, too, although Thomas said others have been interested. But the biotech was waiting to find a partner that could bring a better delivery mechanism to the deal. 

Thomas and Huang were careful not to reveal the indications they’ll tackle, but they did say the underlying goal is to improve gene editing as a whole. As they work through the research partnership, they will select indications that seem promising along the way.

“We don't want to just do a simple gene knockout. We don't want to just do simple point mutation, single variant mutation,” Huang said. “We are dreaming bigger, creating different tools that scientists can think of that allow doctors to treat genetic diseases.”

The companies plan to deliver their medicine where other gene editing companies have already established a precedent—the liver, using delivery tech Moderna already has, Huang confirmed. He acknowledged that Intellia, the first company to present first-in-human data for a gene editing therapy this summer, is the “pioneer” in the space. That company’s technology targets the liver as well.

Moderna and Metagenomi will begin with building on technology that exists to get some candidates into the clinic as soon as possible, with a long-term goal of making broader improvements to gene editing.

“We have gene editing technology that's ready to go to the clinic right now. We plan to work with Moderna to move that into the clinic as fast as we can,” Thomas said. “But we also have a long-term vision to develop the best tools for in vivo gene editing, and that's going to be what we work on.”

Gene editing has so far focused on Cas9 technology, but Thomas thinks there’s more out there. The company recent unveiled data on its CRISPR-associated transposases system that can be used to precisely integrate large DNA fragments into genomes, allowing for new editing techniques beyond the currently available technology. 

“We're just at the tip of the iceberg … there's no reason why evolution would stop at Cas9 and only give us one thing,” he said.

Huang pointed to Moderna’s well documented history of a company that can take the long game or immediately pivot when, for example, the world needs a life-saving vaccine. The company developed its first vaccine in 2013, back when mRNA technology seemed as though it was “nothing valuable.” So a one- or two-year deal would not have been “satisfactory,” he said.

“I hope in five to 10 years’ time, when people are thinking about in vivo gene editing, they think of Moderna and Metagenomi together,” Huang said.

The question remains whether this will be Moderna's only partnership in gene editing, or if they will pile on others down the line. Huang was, as expected, tight lipped, but still open to the prospect for other deals. 

“We will be keeping our options open about complementary technologies that will be delivering or improving potencies in other aspects of genome editing, so Moderna will always keep an open mind and option."

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/moderna-finally-cracks-into-gene-editing-metagenomi-pact-thanks-irresistible-data