Ei­sai, Bio­gen bat­tered by con­tro­ver­sy over PhII Alzheimer's study af­ter post­ing pos­i­tive re­sults

At first blush, Ei­sai and Bio­gen post­ed the kind of promis­ing da­ta for BAN2401 that might have over­come some doubts about its po­ten­tial as a treat­ment for Alzheimer’s, a field marked by the wreck­age of re­peat­ed, high pro­file fail­ures. But in­stead of cheer­ing on ev­i­dence of suc­cess, a large group of an­a­lysts last night ze­roed in on a cru­cial change in the study that could have con­found­ed the da­ta pre­sent­ed — and now we have a brand new con­tro­ver­sy to add to the lit­er­a­ture of Alzheimer’s.

Af­ter build­ing sky high ex­pec­ta­tions over the course of the past few days, Ei­sai in­ves­ti­ga­tors al­lied with Bio­gen $BI­IB said Wednes­day af­ter­noon that the high dose of BAN2401 pro­duced pos­i­tive da­ta in a mid-stage study with a sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant 30% slow­ing in the rate of de­cline com­pared to the place­bo arm in the high dose arm of the study at 18 months.

That 30% slow­ing was based on a unique set of goals out­lined in their be­spoke AD­COMS mea­sure of the clin­i­cal de­cline ex­pe­ri­enced by pa­tients with Alzheimer’s, which is an­oth­er rea­son why there’s so much de­bate over the val­ue of the re­sults. But the re­search team al­so not­ed that there was a re­mark­able 47% im­prove­ment in the rate of de­cline at 18 months when the high dose arm was mea­sured by the stan­dard ADAS-Cog test.

A win­ner? No, be­cause it turns out there was a big catch.

Crit­ics quick­ly be­gan pulling apart the da­ta, find­ing enough holes in it to squelch Bio­gen’s share price, which plunged 12%. Ei­sai would quick­ly fol­low with its own drub­bing af­ter ques­tions were raised in a call with Bio­gen ex­ecs about a de­ci­sion by Eu­ro­pean reg­u­la­tors to move APOe4 car­ri­ers out of the high dose arm as they were wor­ried by the threat of brain swelling — or ARIA-E — which they are prone to. APOe4 car­ri­ers are at high­er risk of the dis­ease as well as faster pro­gres­sion, and putting them in low­er dose arms — while leav­ing APOe4 pa­tients in the place­bo group — raised the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the re­searchers had made it pos­si­ble for the high dose arm to hit sta­tis­ti­cal sig­nif­i­cance.

Oth­er­wise, it could have all been just an­oth­er fail­ure.

Ge­of­frey Porges notes this morn­ing:

The dis­par­i­ty be­tween the 30% rate of APOe4 car­ri­ers in the high­est 10mg/kg Q2 week arm, and the 71% rate in the place­bo arm, and the 73-91% rate of APOe4 car­ri­ers in the oth­er ac­tive arms, pro­vides a pu­ta­tive ex­pla­na­tion for the dif­fer­ence in cog­ni­tion de­cline seen in the high­est dose arm com­pared to place­bo and oth­er ac­tive arms. If Ei­sai’s sub group analy­sis sug­gests that this dif­fer­ence in de­cline per­sists even in the pa­tients in all the arms who are not APOe4 car­ri­ers, this pro­gram may have a fu­ture, but if not, it could eas­i­ly turn out to be an in­ter­est­ing arte­fact in the on­go­ing be­ta amy­loid Alzheimer’s dis­ease saga.

And Bio­gen CMO Al San­drock didn’t ex­clude the pos­si­bil­i­ty.

“It’s one of the first things we’re go­ing to look at, is the sub­group analy­sis of APOE4 car­ri­ers ver­sus non car­ri­ers,” he told an­a­lysts. “I’m sure my col­leagues at Ei­sai are work­ing on it right now.”

What Ei­sai want­ed to fo­cus on is this: The drug clear­ly sep­a­rat­ed from place­bo at 6 months for ADAS-Cog and con­tin­ued out for 18 months, as you can see here:


That hit a p-val­ue of 0.017, which was bet­ter than their own in­ter­nal­ly cre­at­ed mea­sure­ment, specif­i­cal­ly de­signed to pick up cog­ni­tive sig­nals in ear­ly-stage pa­tients.

The da­ta were re­viewed at the Alzheimer’s As­so­ci­a­tion In­ter­na­tion­al Con­fer­ence in Chica­go. And Ei­sai has been en­thu­si­as­ti­cal­ly seiz­ing on the pos­si­bil­i­ty of an ac­cel­er­at­ed ap­proval — which is now high­ly un­like­ly.

“The goal is to bring this to pa­tients as soon as pos­si­ble,” says Ivan Che­ung — who runs the US group for Ei­sai. But that’s go­ing to take some work, and close talks with the FDA.

The da­ta al­so re­mained pos­i­tive when pulled out at 6 and 12 months, he adds. “The curve ex­pands over time,” he notes, though the com­pa­ny is not de­tail­ing the hard num­bers on those end­points, oth­er than say­ing they are sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant.

In­vestors, though, were in a crit­i­cal frame of mind, look­ing at the down­side af­ter all the chat­ter.

Ivan Che­ung

Why would the ADAS-Cog test look bet­ter than AD­COMS? 

“At this ear­ly stage of dis­ease you have more cog­ni­tive than func­tion­al de­cline,” Che­ung tells me, which is why a cog­ni­tive test is more like­ly to pick it up. 

Promis­ing da­ta in mid-stage Alzheimer’s are not new, but it’s al­so rare to see sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant num­bers like these. Af­ter more than a decade of fail­ure, some skep­tics will re­quire sol­id piv­otal da­ta from two stud­ies to con­vince them, but the de­vel­op­ment part­ners say they are ready to start ex­plor­ing path­ways to an ac­cel­er­at­ed ap­proval at a time the FDA has been say­ing they are in­creas­ing­ly open to pro­vid­ing an ap­proval based on cog­ni­tion alone, rather than both cog­ni­tion and func­tion — a long­time gold stan­dard.

Baird’s Bri­an Sko­r­ney said Thurs­day morn­ing there’s no chance of that hap­pen­ing now.

Now that we have seen it, we’re ac­tu­al­ly shocked that Bio­gen hadn’t cleared up any spec­u­la­tion about fil­ing on this da­ta when it first came up fol­low­ing the top line an­nounce­ment a cou­ple of weeks ago. Ron Farkas may not be there any longer but Bil­ly Dunn and Er­ic Bast­ings are no pushovers in FDA’s Di­vi­sion of Neu­rol­o­gy Prod­ucts and we don’t see any way that this study meets the reg­u­la­to­ry thresh­old of “sub­stan­tial ev­i­dence of ef­fi­ca­cy.”

The Phase II con­tro­ver­sy comes as hopes for the amy­loid be­ta hy­poth­e­sis have dwin­dled, es­pe­cial­ly af­ter twin set­backs for BACE drugs by both Mer­ck and an Eli Lil­ly/As­traZeneca team.

Any ap­proval here would like­ly green-light an in­stant block­buster, with mil­lions of pa­tients ea­ger to try any­thing that might be able to bend the curve of this aw­ful, mem­o­ry-wast­ing dis­ease.

So here come some added caveats. The study failed the pri­ma­ry end­point at 12 months al­ready, which was es­tab­lished as a Bayesian analy­sis in­tend­ed to spot suc­cess at an ear­li­er stage. But push­ing ahead, they switched to more stan­dard tech­niques.

Here’s the way the mar­ket was bet­ting ahead of the re­view.

At a 10% im­prove­ment over the con­trol arm, you could ex­pect plen­ty of skep­ti­cism. Mizuho said it wouldn’t be sur­prised — but would be pleased — with a 15% slow­ing.  

But wait. Leerink’s Ge­of­frey Porges be­lieved that any­thing un­der 15% was like­ly to be seen as a weak re­sponse, with dam­ag­ing re­sults for the de­vel­op­ers’ stocks. Any­thing over 30%, he said, would dri­ve a ma­jor ral­ly, on top of the one al­ready seen on the top line da­ta.

I asked USC Alzheimer’s ex­pert Lon Schnei­der for his take. His re­sponse:

This is what I’ve been telling peo­ple.
Not a ver­dict. Not a bi­na­ry event. The spon­sors learned what they need­ed to re dose range, 64% prob­a­bil­i­ty of be­ing su­pe­ri­or to place­bo by a 25% re­duc­tion on their com­pos­ite score. The drug does what it was en­gi­neered to do.

It’s full speed ahead at Ei­sai.

Lynn Kramer

“We are do­ing a bunch of sub­group analy­sis,” says Ei­sai chief med­ical of­fi­cer for neu­rol­o­gy Lynn Kramer, “look­ing for big­ger ef­fects and so on. We will be tak­ing that to FDA in the fall about next steps and what we may do. Op­tions in­clude an ac­cel­er­at­ed ap­proval,” but that would re­quire an on­go­ing Phase III to nail down.

All that has yet to play out.

 

UP­DAT­ED: Mer­ck pulls Keytru­da in SCLC af­ter ac­cel­er­at­ed nod. Is the FDA get­ting tough on drug­mak­ers that don't hit their marks?

In what could be an early shot in the battle against drugmakers that whiff on confirmatory studies to support accelerated approvals, the FDA ordered Bristol Myers Squibb late last year to give up Opdivo’s approval in SCLC. Now, Merck is next on the firing line — are we seeing the FDA buckling down on post-marketing offenders?

Merck has withdrawn its marketing approval for PD-(L)1 inhibitor Keytruda in metastatic small cell lung cancer as part of what it describes as an “industry-wide evaluation” by the FDA of drugs that do not meet the post-marketing checkpoints on which their accelerated nods were based, the company said Monday.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 102,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Hal Barron, Endpoints UKBIO19

GSK, Vir's hopes for a Covid-19 an­ti­body fall flat in NIH 'mas­ter pro­to­col' with no ben­e­fit in hos­pi­tal­ized pa­tients

GlaxoSmithKline and Vir Biotechnology were hopeful that one of their partnered antibodies would carve out a win after getting the invite to a major NIH study in hospitalized Covid-19 patients. But just like Eli Lilly, the pair’s drug couldn’t hit the mark, and now they’ll be left to take a hard look at the game plan.

The NIH has shut down enrollment for GSK and Vir’s antibody VIR-7831 in its late-stage ACTIV-3 trial after the drug showed negligible effect in achieving sustained recovery in hospitalized Covid-19 patients, the partners said Wednesday.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 102,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

The 2021 top 100 bio­phar­ma in­vestors: As the pan­dem­ic hit and IPOs boomed, VCs swung in­to ac­tion like nev­er be­fore

The global pandemic may have roiled economies, killed hundreds of thousands and throttled entire industries, but the only effect it had on biopharma venture investing was to help turbocharge the field to giddy new heights.

Below you’ll find the new top 100 venture investors in the industry, ranked by the number of deals they were publicly involved in, as tracked by DealForma chief Chris Dokomajilar. The numbers master then calculated the estimated amount of money they put into each deal — divvying up the cash by the number of players — to indicate how they managed their syndicates.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

As Brain­Storm con­tin­ues to tout ‘clear sig­nal’ on ALS drug, the FDA of­fers a rare pub­lic slap­down on the da­ta

A little more than a week after BrainStorm acknowledged that regulators at the FDA had informed them that the biotech needed more data before it could expect to gain an approval for its ALS treatment NurOwn — while still touting a “clear signal” of efficacy and not ruling out an application — the agency has decided to clarify the record in a most unusual statement.

The FDA statement amounts to a straight slap own, offering a different set of efficacy numbers from the company’s public presentation last November and ruling out any chance of statistical significance.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 102,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Eli Lil­ly claims suc­cess in a new JAK in­di­ca­tion: hair loss

Over the last decade, drugmakers have proven JAK inhibitors can treat a smattering of immune-related diseases ranging from rheumatoid arthritis to Covid-19. Now Eli Lilly has pulled out a new one.

Lilly and its biotech partner Incyte announced Wednesday that their JAK inhibitor baricitinib effectively regrew patients’ hair in a Phase III trial for alopecia areata, an autoimmune condition that can cause sudden, severe and patchy hair loss. Lilly didn’t break down the results from the 546-patient trial, but the primary endpoint was improvement on a standard score for alopecia symptoms.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 102,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

In­tro­duc­ing End­points FDA+, our new pre­mi­um week­ly reg­u­la­to­ry news re­port led by Zachary Bren­nan

CRLs. 483s. CBER, CDER and RWE. For biopharma professionals, these acronyms command attention because of the fundamental role FDA plays in drug development. Now Endpoints is doubling down on regulatory coverage, and launching a weekly report focusing on developments out of White Oak, with analysis and insight into what it all means.

Coverage will be led by our new senior editor, Zachary Brennan. He joins Endpoints from POLITICO, where he covered pharma. Prior to that he was the managing editor for Regulatory Focus, a news publication from the Regulatory Affairs Professionals Society.

Antoine Papiernik, Sofinnova managing director (Business Wire)

Sofinno­va Part­ners stays fo­cused on late-stage deals with a new, $540M crossover fund

One of Europe’s most high-profile biopharma investors is getting $540 million to invest in new crossover deals for late-stage companies.

The Paris-based VC says the fresh Sofinnova Crossover Fund raise positions them as the “largest crossover investor in Europe dedicated to late-stage biopharma and medtech investments.”

They got a leg up in France after winning a special “Tibi” designation from the French government, giving them access to a pool of €6 billion that helped them gain an edge with institutional investors. Since they were founded close to 50 years ago, the venture group has backed more than 500 companies and currently has more than €2 billion under management.

Thank you, next: Take­da hands Ovid $196M cash to rein back in Phase III-ready seizure drug, re­viv­ing bat­tered stock

Soticlestat made it.

Takeda is bringing the drug back into its fold more than four years after first entrusting the team at Ovid with the mid-stage clinical work. For all that — generating what they saw as positive Phase II data in Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome — the biotech has been rewarded with $196 million in upfront cash, with another $660 million reserved for regulatory and commercial milestones.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 102,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Michael Shpigelmacher

Khosla joins bet on un­con­ven­tion­al start­up look­ing to send drug de­liv­er­ing ro­bots in­to the brain

When Michael Shpigelmacher started the project, he knew he’d have to fund it himself. Every other effort of its kind was academic, rejected as too risky by investors.

Shpigelmacher, a robotics geek and entrepreneur who had drifted into consulting for pharma, wanted to build the real-life equivalent of technology from the 1960s film “Fantastic Voyage,” the one where a submarine crew is shrunk to “about the size of a microbe” and sent on a mission to repair a scientist’s brain. He scanned the literature, found the lab that was working on the most advanced project — at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, it turned out — and started funding them with money from his and his co-founders’ own accounts, along with some seed cash from friends and family.