Af­ter los­ing its high-pro­file rheuma­toid arthri­tis part­ner­ship just two years ear­li­er, Sanofi’s Bel­gium-based biotech Abl­ynx could once again put an Ab­b­Vie pact on the chop­ping block af­ter post­ing a Phase II flop this morn­ing.

Abl­ynx re­port­ed out bad news that vo­bar­il­izum­ab dis­ap­point­ed yet again, fail­ing to meet its pri­ma­ry end­points in a Phase II lu­pus study. It’s the same drug that fiz­zled in RA, which Ab­b­Vie punt­ed back in 2016.

The drug was the sub­ject of a glob­al li­cens­ing agree­ment inked with Ab­b­Vie back in 2013, which came with an up­front pay­ment of $175 mil­lion and mile­stones up to $665 mil­lion. The deal gave Ab­b­Vie the op­tion to li­cense vo­bar­il­izum­ab in RA and in lu­pus. It’s un­clear what Ab­b­Vie will choose, but the fu­ture isn’t look­ing good for vo­bar­il­izum­ab.

Robert Zeldin

“Ab­b­Vie will re­view the com­plete da­ta set when avail­able from the Phase II Steady SLE study to de­ter­mine whether to ex­er­cise its op­tion to li­cense vo­bar­il­izum­ab,” Abl­ynx said in a state­ment. “Should Ab­b­Vie ex­er­cise the op­tion, it would trig­ger a pay­ment to Abl­ynx. If the op­tion is not ex­er­cised, Abl­ynx’s agree­ment with Ab­b­Vie would ter­mi­nate.”

Abl­ynx, which has a nanobody plat­form tech and sev­er­al drugs in its pipeline, was snatched up by Sanofi for $4.8 bil­lion in Jan­u­ary. That was af­ter shoot­ing down two pre­vi­ous bids from No­vo Nordisk. The deal got Sanofi Abl­ynx’s lead drug capla­cizum­ab, which has shown con­sid­er­able promise in treat­ing the ul­tra-rare blood clot­ting dis­or­der ac­quired throm­bot­ic throm­bo­cy­topenic pur­pu­ra (aTTP).

Still, the vo­bar­il­izum­ab fail­ure will like­ly sting. The failed Phase II study en­rolled 312 pa­tients with lu­pus across five treat­ment arms. Ad­verse events that led to study drug dis­con­tin­u­a­tion were re­port­ed in 12.4% of all vo­bar­il­izum­ab treat­ed pa­tients com­pared to 6.5% in the place­bo group. Two deaths were re­port­ed in the vo­bar­il­izum­ab group.

“We are dis­ap­point­ed that vo­bar­il­izum­ab didn’t show a dose re­sponse in the analy­sis of the study’s pri­ma­ry end­point, how­ev­er, vo­bar­il­izum­ab was well tol­er­at­ed in all test­ed dose groups, con­firm­ing its fa­vor­able safe­ty pro­file,” said Abl­ynx CMO Robert Zeldin in a state­ment. “We will con­tin­ue to an­a­lyze the full da­ta set and thank the study par­tic­i­pants and their fam­i­lies as well as the in­ves­ti­ga­tors and staff who con­tributed to this study.”

Another big drug approval came through on Friday afternoon as the FDA OK’d AbbVie’s upadacitinib — an oral JAK1 inhibitor that is hitting the rheumatoid arthritis market with a black box warning of serious malignancies, infections and thrombosis reflecting fears associated with the class.

It will be sold as Rinvoq — at a wholesale price of $59,000 a year — and will likely soon face competition from a drug that AbbVie once controlled, and spurned. Reuters reports that a 4-week supply of Humira, by comparison, is $5,174, adding up to about $67,000 a year.

After a “hot” period of rapid growth between 2009 and 2012, and a relatively “cooler” period of slower growth from 2013 to 2015, China has once again become a top-of-mind priority for the CEOs of most large, multinational pharmaceutical companies.

At the International Pharma Forum, hosted in March in Beijing by the R&D Based Pharmaceutical Association Committee (RDPAC) and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), no fewer than seven CEOs of major multinational pharmaceutical firms participated, including GSK, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma, Merck KGaA, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB. A few days earlier, the CEOs of several other large multinationals attended the China Development Forum, an annual business forum hosted by the research arm of China’s State Council. It’s hard to imagine any other country, except the US, having such drawing power at CEO level.

ICER has some strong words for PTC, Sarepta and the FDA as the US drug price watchdog concludes that as currently priced, their respective new treatments for Duchenne muscular dystrophy are decidedly not cost-effective.

The final report — which cements the conclusions of a draft issued in May — incorporates the opinion of a panel of 17 experts ICER convened in a public meeting last month. It also based its analysis of Emflaza (deflazacort) and Exondys 51 (eteplirsen) on updated annual costs of $81,400 and over $1 million, respectively, after citing “incorrect” lower numbers in the initial calculations.