Biotech bil­lion­aire faces ac­cu­sa­tions of fraud for $1.3B 'catch-and-kil­l' can­cer drug deal


When biotech bil­lion­aire Patrick Soon-Sh­iong arranged a $90 mil­lion up­front pay­ment to Sor­ren­to from Nant­Phar­ma 4 years ago to ac­quire Cynvil­oq — promis­ing $1.2 bil­lion more in mile­stones — he her­ald­ed the deal, say­ing an “op­por­tu­ni­ty to de­vel­op com­bi­na­tion reg­i­mens of low-dose metro­nom­ic use of this ac­tive drug is an im­por­tant step in trans­form­ing can­cer care as we know it to­day.”

For his part, Sor­ren­to CEO Hen­ry Ji said he was “ex­cit­ed” that Soon-Sh­iong had stepped in to speed these new com­bos along.

To­day, he calls it the first act in a years-long swin­dle. And he’s su­ing Soon-Sh­iong.

As spelled out in the law­suit, which was wide­ly dis­trib­uted to the press, Ji al­leges that Soon-Sh­iong not on­ly played out a “catch-and-kill” plan to elim­i­nate a com­peti­tor to Soon-Sh­iong’s Abrax­ane, which he sold to Cel­gene in a deal that left him with more than a bil­lion dol­lars in Cel­gene stock, he used a big chunk of the mon­ey Sor­ren­to got in the up­front to help cov­er his costs for do­ing it.

Late Wednes­day evening, though, Soon-Sh­iong blast­ed back with a de­tailed re­sponse:

The law­suit is a cyn­i­cal at­tempt to de­flect from Sor­ren­to’s own breach of con­tract. The al­le­ga­tion that we have not de­vel­oped Cynvil­oq to pro­tect the sales of Abrax­ane is false and it ig­nores the facts. Be­cause it is to­tal­ly with­out mer­it, we shall de­fend our­selves vig­or­ous­ly against this base­less al­le­ga­tion.

There’s lots more, in­clud­ing breach of con­tract and a woe­ful lack of fol­low through, which I’ve in­clud­ed in its en­tire­ty be­low the al­le­ga­tions.

Ini­tial­ly, Ji says, Soon-Sh­iong was in­ter­est­ed in hav­ing Cel­gene buy it to pro­tect the Abrax­ane fran­chise, us­ing the sales from the new drug to pay off any loss­es from the bioe­quiv­a­lent Abrax­ane. Cel­gene, though, passed on an­titrust grounds, leav­ing Soon-Sh­iong to han­dle it when San­doz came call­ing with a deal in hand for the drug.

Hen­ry Ji, Sor­ren­to

“When Soon-Sh­iong heard about the po­ten­tial San­doz deal, he pan­icked,” says the law­suit, which was writ­ten as some­thing of a pot­boil­er. “He re­al­ized that if Cynvil­oq were sold to San­doz — a di­rect com­peti­tor to Cel­gene that had deep ex­pe­ri­ence bring­ing biosim­i­lars or gener­ics like Cynvil­oq suc­cess­ful­ly to mar­ket — it could dev­as­tate the sales of Abrax­ane, sig­nif­i­cant­ly dam­age Cel­gene’s share price, and there­fore per­son­al­ly cost Soon-Sh­iong hun­dreds of mil­lions of dol­lars.”

At the same time the sale went through in 2015, the suit con­tin­ues, Ji and Soon-Sh­iong cre­at­ed a joint ven­ture ded­i­cat­ed to im­munother­a­peu­tic an­ti­body can­cer drug R&D. Ji put up $40 mil­lion from his up­front for it. Then he al­leges that Soon-Sh­iong and his chief le­gal ad­vis­er Charles Kim se­cret­ly con­spired to pay Nant­Phar­ma its $90 mil­lion, drain­ing the JV’s ac­count of the cash it had, in­clud­ing Sor­ren­to’s $40 mil­lion.

As for Cynvil­oq, the suit says Soon-Sh­iong put it on a shelf, let­ting patents ex­pire and any val­ue in it leak away. Dur­ing that time, Cel­gene has been a reg­u­lar in­vestor in Soon-Sh­iong’s com­pa­nies, giv­ing them a role to play as the big Bris­tol-My­ers Squibb deal faces a share­hold­er vote in com­ing days. And Ji wants to have the $90 mil­lion re­turned to the JV so it can do its work, among oth­er things.

This isn’t the first time Soon-Sh­iong has been ac­cused of shady ac­tiv­i­ty. STAT pub­lished a se­ries of ar­ti­cles claim­ing that the bil­lion­aire had re­cap­tured a large do­na­tion to the Uni­ver­si­ty of Utah, while Politi­co fo­cused on an ap­par­ent scheme in which one of his com­pa­nies ob­tained a prop­er­ty from a non­prof­it at an un­der­val­ued price.

Through­out it all, Soon-Sh­iong, who’s cast him­self in the role of an R&D war­rior out to cure can­cer, has de­nied any wrong­do­ing and gone on to buy the Los An­ge­les Times. I asked Soon-Sh­iong and Cel­gene rep­re­sen­ta­tives if they had any com­ment.

Cel­gene’s me­dia shop has been dead silent for months. But they did re­spond here, with a spokesper­son say­ing “we don’t have a com­ment” about the suit.

Here’s the more de­tailed re­but­tal from Soon-Sh­iong.

Here are the facts:

When we ac­quired Cynvil­oq from Sor­ren­to, it was part of a larg­er trans­ac­tion in which we al­so ac­quired the ex­clu­sive rights to over 75 an­ti­bod­ies. Sor­ren­to has on­ly pro­vid­ed 15 an­ti­bod­ies to date, in breach of its con­trac­tu­al com­mit­ments, and has re­fused to oth­er­wise hon­or its ex­clu­siv­i­ty and oth­er oblig­a­tions. As one ex­am­ple, de­spite hav­ing ex­clu­sive­ly li­censed a PD-L1 an­ti­body to us, Sor­ren­to has since li­censed the same PD-L1 an­ti­body to a Ko­re­an com­pa­ny and an­nounced a Phase 1 study, in breach of our agree­ment.

Nant­Phar­ma ac­quired the Pa­cli­tax­el drug with the pub­lic rep­re­sen­ta­tion from Sor­ren­to that the mol­e­cule was found to be bioe­quiv­a­lent to Abrax­ane and that the FDA had agreed with Sor­ren­to’s find­ing of bioe­quiv­a­lence based on a meet­ing with the FDA. Fol­low­ing the ac­qui­si­tion, we dis­cov­ered that Sor­ren­to had mis­rep­re­sent­ed this in­for­ma­tion. Up­on dig­ging in­to the raw da­ta from the Sor­ren­to clin­i­cal tri­al, our sta­tis­ti­cians in fact dis­cov­ered that the drug was in­deed not bioe­quiv­a­lent and re­port­ed this find­ing to the com­pa­ny. We shared these find­ings with Sor­ren­to and in­formed them that it would not be pos­si­ble for us to file un­der the bioe­quiv­lance ap­proval path­way be­cause the da­ta did not sup­port that ap­proach.

Fur­ther­more, when we re­quest­ed a new sup­ply of the drug from the Ko­re­an man­u­fac­tur­er, we al­so dis­cov­ered that the for­mu­la­tion con­tained an im­pu­ri­ty and this re­quired the sup­pli­er to iden­ti­fy the cause of the im­pu­ri­ty and to mod­i­fy the man­u­fac­tur­er’s process to re­move the im­pu­ri­ty. This process was at­tempt­ed by the sup­pli­er who pre­sent­ed their re­sults to us re­cent­ly, but un­for­tu­nate­ly the process im­prove­ment fur­ther in­creased the in­sta­bil­i­ty of the drug. The need for fur­ther de­vel­op­ment to im­prove the sta­bil­i­ty by the man­u­fac­tur­er is cur­rent­ly un­der re­view while we pur­sue the safe­ty analy­sis of the orig­i­nal for­mu­la­tion in a Phase 1 study.

Be­cause the drug re­quired a new process, fur­ther sta­bil­i­ty test­ing, and a com­plete new Phase 1 clin­i­cal study, we sold the drug to our JV with Sor­ren­to, which had both reg­u­la­to­ry and for­mu­la­tion ex­per­tise. We ini­ti­at­ed  a Phase 1 study and this study is cur­rent­ly open and we are ac­tive­ly try­ing to re­cruit pa­tients as of this date. The state­ments and claims made by Sor­ren­to are thus puz­zling in light of our  dili­gent and re­spon­si­ble ac­tiv­i­ty ever since we ac­quired the drug, and can on­ly be viewed as a cyn­i­cal at­tempt to de­flect from their breach of con­tract.”

Steven Feld­man, an at­tor­ney with Hue­ston Hen­ni­gan rep­re­sent­ing Sor­ren­to, was ea­ger to re­ply.

It de­fies cred­i­bil­i­ty that a sci­en­tist and busi­ness­man as so­phis­ti­cat­ed and suc­cess­ful as Dr. Patrick Soon-Sh­iong en­tered in­to a $1.3 bil­lion trans­ac­tion with­out ex­am­in­ing the da­ta or con­duct­ing due dili­gence. Dis­cov­ery in this case will re­veal the nu­mer­ous false as­ser­tions in Dr. Soon-Sh­iong’s re­sponse.  We look for­ward to lit­i­gat­ing this case.


Im­age: Patrick Soon-Sh­iong (NHS Con­fed­er­a­tion)

Secretary of health and human services Alex Azar speaking in the Rose Garden at the White House (Photo: AFP)

Trump’s HHS claims ab­solute au­thor­i­ty over the FDA, clear­ing path to a vac­cine EUA

The top career staff at the FDA have vowed not to let politics get in the way of science when looking at vaccine data this fall. But Alex Azar, who happens to be their boss’s boss, apparently won’t even give them a chance to stand in the way.

In a new memorandum issued Tuesday last week, the HHS chief stripped health agencies under his purview — including the FDA — of their rulemaking ability, asserting all such power “is reserved to the Secretary.” Sheila Kaplan of the New York Times first obtained and reported the details of the September 15 bulletin.

Dan Skovronsky, Eli Lilly CSO

UP­DAT­ED: An­a­lysts are quick to pan Eli Lil­ly's puz­zling first cut of pos­i­tive clin­i­cal da­ta for its Covid-19 an­ti­body

Eli Lilly spotlighted a success for one of 3 doses of their closely-watched Covid-19 antibody drug Wednesday morning. But analysts quickly highlighted some obvious anomalies that could come back to haunt the pharma giant as it looks for an emergency use authorization to launch marketing efforts.

The pharma giant reported that LY-CoV555, developed in collaboration with AbCellera, significantly reduced the rate of hospitalization among patients who were treated with the antibody. The drug arm of the study had a 1.7% hospitalization rate, compared to 6% in the control group, marking a 72% drop in risk.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 90,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Eli Lilly CSO Dan Skovronsky (file photo)

#ES­MO20: Eli Lil­ly shows off the da­ta for its Verzenio suc­cess. Was it worth $18 bil­lion?

The press release alone, devoid of any number except for the size of the trial, added nearly $20 billion to Eli Lilly’s market cap back in June. Now investors and oncologists will get to see if the data live up to the hype.

On Sunday at ESMO, Eli Lilly announced the full results for its Phase III MonarchE trial of Verzenio, showing that across over 5,000 women who had had HR+, HER2- breast cancer, the drug reduced the odds of recurrence by 25%. That meant 7.8% of the patients on the drug arm saw their cancers return within 2 years, compared with 11.3% on the placebo arm.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 90,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Greg Friberg (File photo)

#ES­MO20: Am­gen team nails down sol­id ear­ly ev­i­dence of AMG 510’s po­ten­tial for NSCLC, un­lock­ing the door to a wave of KRAS pro­grams

The first time I sat down with Amgen’s Greg Friberg to talk about the pharma giant’s KRAS G12C program for sotorasib (AMG 510) at ASCO a little more than a year ago, there was high excitement about the first glimpse of efficacy from their Phase I study, with 5 of 10 evaluable non-small cell lung cancer patients demonstrating a response to the drug.

After decades of failure targeting KRAS, sotorasib offered the first positive look at a new approach that promised to open a door to a whole new approach by targeting a particular mutation to a big target that had remained “undruggable” for decades.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 90,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

#ES­MO20: Out to beat Tagris­so, J&J touts 100% ORR for EGFR bis­pe­cif­ic/TKI com­bo — fu­el­ing a quick leap to PhI­II

J&J’s one-two punch on EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer has turned up some promising — although decidedly early — results, fueling the idea that there’s yet room to one up on third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Twenty out of 20 advanced NSCLC patients had a response after taking a combination of an in-house TKI dubbed lazertinib and amivantamab, a bispecific antibody targeting both EGFR and cMET engineered on partner Genmab’s platform, J&J reported at ESMO. All were treatment-naïve, and none has seen their cancer progress at a median follow-up of seven months.

#ES­MO20: As­traZeneca aims to spur PRO­found shift in prostate can­cer treat­ment with Lyn­parza OS da­ta

AstraZeneca has unveiled the final, mature overall survival data that cemented Lynparza’s first approval in prostate cancer approval — touting its lead against rivals with the only PARP inhibitor to have demonstrated such benefit.

But getting the Merck-partnered drug to the right patients remains a challenge, something the companies are hoping to change with the new data cut.

The OS numbers on the subgroup with BRCA1/2 or ATM-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer are similar to the first look on offer when the FDA expanded the label in May: Lynparza reduced the risk of death by 31% versus Xtandi and Zytiga. Patients on Lynparza lived a median of 19.1 months, compared to 14.7 months for the anti-androgen therapies (p = 0.0175).

Exelixis CEO Michael Morrissey (file photo)

#ES­MO20: Look out Mer­ck. Bris­tol My­ers and Ex­elix­is stake out their com­bo’s claim to best-in-class sta­tus for front­line kid­ney can­cer

Now that the PD-(L)1 checkpoints are deeply entrenched in the oncology market, it’s time to welcome a wave of combination therapies — beyond chemo — looking to extend their benefit to larger numbers of patients. Bristol Myers Squibb ($BMY} and Exelixis {EXEL} are close to the front of that line.

Today at ESMO the collaborators pulled the curtain back on some stellar data for their combination of Opdivo (the PD-1) and Cabometyx (the TKI), marking a significant advance for the blockbuster Bristol Myers franchise while offering a big leg up for the team at Exelixis.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 90,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Donald Trump and White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, before boarding Marine One (Getty Images)

Pric­ing deal col­laps­es over Big Phar­ma's re­fusal to is­sue $100 'cash card­s' be­fore the elec­tion — re­port

Late in August, as negotiations on a pricing deal with President Trump reached a boiling point, PhRMA president Stephen Ubl sent an email update to the 34 biopharma chiefs that sit on his board. He wrote that if the industry did not agree to pay for a $100 “cash card” sent to seniors before November, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows was going to tell the news media Big Pharma was refusing to “share the savings” with the elderly — and that all of the blame for failed drug pricing negotiations would lie squarely on the industry.

#ES­MO20: It’s not just Keytru­da any­more — Mer­ck spot­lights 3 top ear­ly-stage can­cer drugs

Any $12 billion megablockbuster in the portfolio tends to overshadow everything else in the pipeline. Which is something Merck can tell you a little bit about.

Keytruda not only dominates the PD-(L)1 field, it looms over everything Merck does, to the point some analysts wonder if Merck is a one-trick pony.

There’s no shortage of Keytruda data on display at ESMO this weekend, but now the focus is shifting to the future role of new drugs and combos in maintaining that lead position for years to come. And the pharma giant has a special focus for 3 early-stage efforts where Roger Perlmutter’s oncology team is placing some big bets.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 90,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.