Af­ter abrupt­ly pulling its mar­ket­ing ap­pli­ca­tion, DBV may be left with peanuts in race against Aim­mune

They say slow and steady wins the race. In the sprint to mar­ket the first peanut al­ler­gy treat­ment, hare DBV Tech­nolo­gies $DB­VT has just fum­bled, an­nounc­ing on Wednes­day that it had re­scind­ed the mar­ket­ing ap­pli­ca­tion for its peanut al­ler­gy patch, fol­low­ing dis­cus­sions with FDA reg­u­la­tors who are seem­ing­ly un­hap­py with the state of man­u­fac­tur­ing and qual­i­ty con­trol da­ta sub­mit­ted. Mean­while, tor­toise Aim­mune $AIMT is now in pole po­si­tion to leapfrog its ri­val to se­cure first-mover ad­van­tage in the so-far un­der­served mar­ket.

To be sure, both com­pa­nies have had their share of ups and downs. In Oc­to­ber 2017, DBV re­port­ed its treat­ment — dubbed Vi­askin Peanut — was un­able to mark a sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant sep­a­ra­tion from a place­bo in a Phase III tri­al, oblit­er­at­ing its shares, al­though the Parisian drug de­vel­op­er said it would march ahead with a mar­ket­ing ap­pli­ca­tion. Four months lat­er in 2018, arch ri­val Aim­mune came out with piv­otal da­ta on its drug, AR101, which were de­cid­ed­ly pos­i­tive, but in­vestors took is­sue with the mag­ni­tude of pa­tients that dropped out of the drug arm. In re­sponse, Nestlé Health Sci­ence-backed Aim­mune al­so so­lid­i­fied its plans to sub­mit its ap­pli­ca­tion, which is ex­pect­ed by the end of 2018.

Daniel Tassé

“Al­though the agency did not ref­er­ence any med­ical or clin­i­cal ques­tions with the sub­mis­sion of Vi­askin Peanut, the FDA did com­mu­ni­cate that the lev­el of de­tail with re­gards to da­ta on man­u­fac­tur­ing and qual­i­ty con­trols was in­suf­fi­cient in the BLA,” said DBV chief Daniel Tassé said in a state­ment on Wednes­day.

JMP an­a­lyst Li­isa Bayko was not as con­vinced.  “Man­age­ment as­sumes that there are no con­cerns around Vi­askin Peanut’s clin­i­cal mod­ule be­cause there were no ques­tions from the FDA re­gard­ing that sec­tion of the BLA. How­ev­er, the com­pa­ny nev­er di­rect­ly asked if the rest of the BLA was ac­cept­able for re­view,” she wrote in a note.

Un­sur­pris­ing­ly the two com­pa­nies’ shares were trad­ing in op­po­site di­rec­tions: DBV’s stock crashed near­ly 49% pre-mar­ket, while Aim­mune’s shares climbed about 6% be­fore the bell.

An­a­lysts keen­ly watch­ing the tri­als and tribu­la­tions of the pair of drug de­vel­op­ers in­di­cat­ed that Aim­mune is now well-poised to be­come the first FDA-ap­proved treat­ment. They al­so ex­pressed out­rage that DBV pro­vid­ed no clear time­line on when and how the ap­pli­ca­tion’s is­sues would be re­solved.

Derek Archi­la

“We are sur­prised this type of in­for­ma­tion would not have been dis­cussed with the agency pri­or to the BLA sub­mis­sion (com­pa­ny has fast track and break­through sta­tus al­low­ing them in­creased agency in­ter­ac­tion) to en­sure the re­quired da­ta was part of the pack­age…this event will on­ly in­crease in­vestors’ skep­ti­cism on man­age­ment’s abil­i­ty to ex­e­cute on its reg­u­la­to­ry ini­tia­tives, which were al­ready con­tro­ver­sial,” Stifel’s Derek Archi­la wrote.

“While DB­VT’s new CEO in­di­cat­ed he an­tic­i­pates be­ing able to pro­vide the ad­di­tion­al in­for­ma­tion need­ed to sup­port the re-fil­ing of the BLA, he of­fered no clear time­lines for a BLA re-sub­mis­sion nor tim­ing on when he ex­pects to up­date in­vestors. The CEO on­ly in­di­cat­ed on the call it would not be “un­rea­son­able” to ex­pect an up­date from the com­pa­ny dur­ing 1Q19, but ul­ti­mate­ly we don’t know when it will oc­cur.”

Bri­an Sko­r­ney

Baird’s Bri­an Sko­r­ney was even more skep­ti­cal of DBV’s for­tunes, sug­gest­ing the de­lay could spell fur­ther dis­as­ter:

(T)his dy­nam­ic like­ly low­ers the prob­a­bil­i­ty that FDA would be will­ing to over­look the Phase 3 fail­ure. Un­der a 1H19 re­view, an Ad­Com would like­ly be set up with the com­pa­ny and pa­tient ad­vo­cates mak­ing the case that “there is noth­ing else avail­able”. Un­der any like­ly re­sub­mis­sion time­line, AR101 is like­ly to have been ap­proved by a Vi­askin Ad­Com and the FDA may be less flex­i­ble when a stan­dard of care ex­ists.

It’s fi­nal­ly over: Bio­gen, Ei­sai scrap big Alzheimer’s PhI­I­Is af­ter a pre­dictable BACE cat­a­stro­phe rais­es safe­ty fears

Months after analysts and investors called on Biogen and Eisai to scrap their BACE drug for Alzheimer’s and move on in the wake of a string of late-stage failures and rising safety fears, the partners have called it quits. And they said they were dropping the drug — elenbecestat — after the independent monitoring board raised concerns about…safety.

We don’t know exactly what researchers found in this latest catastrophe, but the companies noted in their release that investigators had determined that the drug was flunking the risk/benefit analysis.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

It's not per­fect, but it's a good start: FDA pan­elists large­ly en­dorse Aim­mune's peanut al­ler­gy ther­a­py

Two days after a fairly benign review from FDA staff, an independent panel of experts largely endorsed the efficacy and safety of Aimmune’s peanut allergy therapy, laying the groundwork for approval with a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS).

Traditionally, peanut allergies are managed by avoidance, but the threat of accidental exposure cannot be nullified. Some allergists have devised a way to dose patients off-label with peanut protein derived from supermarket products to wean them off their allergies. But the idea behind Aimmune’s product was to standardize the peanut protein, and track the process of desensitization — so when accidental exposure in the real world invariably occurs, patients are less likely to experience a life-threatening allergic reaction.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Lisa M. DeAngelis, MSKCC

MSK picks brain can­cer ex­pert Lisa DeAn­ge­lis as its next CMO — fol­low­ing José Basel­ga’s con­tro­ver­sial ex­it

It’s official. Memorial Sloan Kettering has picked a brain cancer expert as its new physician-in-chief and CMO, replacing José Baselga, who left under a cloud after being singled out by The New York Times and ProPublica for failing to properly air his lucrative industry ties.

His replacement, who now will be in charge of MSK’s cutting-edge research work as well as the cancer care delivered by hundreds of practitioners, is Lisa M. DeAngelis. DeAngelis had been chair of the neurology department and co-founder of MSK’s brain tumor center and was moved in to the acting CMO role in the wake of Baselga’s departure.

Penn team adapts CAR-T tech, reengi­neer­ing mouse cells to treat car­diac fi­bro­sis

After establishing itself as one of the pioneer research centers in the world for CAR-T cancer therapies, creating new attack vehicles to eradicate cancer cells, a team at Penn Medicine has begun the tricky transition of using the basic technology for heart repair work.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Tal Zaks. Moderna

The mR­NA uni­corn Mod­er­na has more ear­ly-stage hu­man da­ta it wants to show off — reach­ing new peaks in prov­ing the po­ten­tial

The whole messenger RNA field has attracted billions of dollars in public and private investor cash gambled on the prospect of getting in on the ground floor. And this morning Boston-based Moderna, one of the leaders in the field, wants to show off a few more of the cards it has to play to prove to you that they’re really in the game.

The whole hand, of course, has yet to be dealt. And there’s no telling who gets to walk with a share of the pot. But any cards on display at this point — especially after being accused of keeping its deck under lock and key — will attract plenty of attention from some very wary, and wired, observers.

“In terms of the complexity and unmet need,” says Tal Zaks, the chief medical officer, “this is peak for what we’ve accomplished.”

Moderna has two Phase I studies it wants to talk about now.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Sanofi takes a $260M hit to ex­tri­cate it­self from a dis­as­trous al­liance with Lex­i­con

Sanofi spent $300 million in cash to get into a $1.7 billion alliance with Lexicon on their SGLT1/2 diabetes drug sotagliflozin. And now that the drug has been spurned by the FDA after burning through a program that provided mixed late-stage data and a late shot at a last-place finish, the French pharma giant is forking over another $260 million to get out of the deal.

Sanofi’s unhappiness was already apparent when the company — now under new CEO Paul Hudson — posted a statement back in July that they were dropping the deal. But it wasn’t that simple. 

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Rit­ter bombs fi­nal PhI­II for sole lac­tose in­tol­er­ance drug — shares plum­met

More than two years ago Ritter Pharmaceuticals managed to find enough silver lining in its Phase IIb/III study — after missing the top-line mark — to propel its lactose intolerance toward a confirmatory trial. But as it turned out, the enthusiasm only set the biotech and its investors up to be sorely disappointed.

This time around there’s little left to salvage. Not only did RP-G28 fail to beat placebo in reducing lactose intolerance symptoms, patients in the treatment group actually averaged a smaller improvement. On a composite score measuring symptoms like abdominal pain, cramping, bloating and gas, patients given the drug had a mean reduction of 3.159 while the placebo cohort saw a 3.420 drop on average (one-sided p-value = 0.0106).

Ear­ly snap­shot of Ad­verum's eye gene ther­a­py sparks con­cern about vi­sion loss

An early-stage update on Adverum Biotechnologies’ intravitreal gene therapy has triggered investor concern, after patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) saw their vision deteriorate, despite signs that the treatment is improving retinal anatomy.

Adverum, on Wednesday, unveiled 24-week data from the OPTIC trial of its experimental therapy, ADVM-022, in six patients who have been administered with one dose of the therapy. On average, patients in the trial had severe disease with an average of 6.2 anti-VEGF injections in the eight months prior to screening and an average annualized injection frequency of 9.3 injections.

Alex Ar­faei trades his an­a­lyst's post for a new role as biotech VC; Sanofi vet heads to Vi­for

Too often, Alex Arfaei arrived too late. 

An analyst at BMO Capital Markets, he’d meet with biotech or pharmaceutical heads for their IPO or secondary funding and his brain, trained on a biology degree and six years at Merck and Endo, would spring with questions: Why this biomarker? Why this design? Why not this endpoint? Not that he could do anything about it. These execs were coming for clinical money; their decisions had been made and finalized long ago.