FDA stiff arms Evo­lus' ri­val to Al­ler­gan’s block­buster Botox, but ex­ecs promise a snap re­sponse

Evo­lus’ $EOLS at­tempt to field a ri­val to Al­ler­gan’s Botox has run in­to prob­lems at the FDA.

The biotech an­nounced Wednes­day morn­ing that the FDA has hand­ed the com­pa­ny a com­plete re­sponse let­ter for DWP-450 (prabot­u­linum­tox­i­nA). But the ex­ec­u­tive team quick­ly pinned the blame on man­u­fac­tur­ing is­sues, say­ing they can bat their re­vised ap­pli­ca­tion back to reg­u­la­tors in 90 days.

The biotech’s state­ment starts with an an­nounce­ment that the FDA has con­firmed “the fa­vor­able com­ple­tion of its pre-ap­proval in­spec­tion of Dae­woong’s man­u­fac­tur­ing fa­cil­i­ty in South Ko­rea which was pur­pose built for pro­duc­tion of DWP-450.” They go on to say that de­spite the re­jec­tion, they’re stay­ing up­beat — re­gard­less of what in­vestors might think.

And they weren’t near­ly as up­beat as man­age­ment. The biotech’s stock plunged 30% on the news.

David Moataze­di

CEO David Moataze­di — an Al­ler­gen vet who took the job just a lit­tle more than a week ago — says the re­jec­tion has noth­ing to do with da­ta, sta­tis­tics, safe­ty or phar­ma­col­o­gy of their prod­uct. “The re­main­ing ques­tions are man­age­able,” he told in­vestors on a call this morn­ing.

The biotech sig­naled at the be­gin­ning of the year that it had some se­ri­ous man­u­fac­tur­ing is­sues to deal with af­ter the FDA is­sued a heav­i­ly redact­ed re­port on their in­spec­tion of the fa­cil­i­ty.

But the com­pa­ny de­clined to get spe­cif­ic, even af­ter be­ing pressed by Wells Far­go an­a­lyst David Maris.

“Ob­vi­ous­ly it’s a con­fi­den­tial doc­u­ment so we’re not go­ing to give gran­u­lar­i­ty,” not­ed CMO Rui Ave­lar.

The com­pa­ny says that it will get a Type 2 re­view for the re­vised pitch, set­ting up time­line for a planned launch next spring. 

“We’ve large­ly de-risked the clin­i­cal de­vel­op­ment pro­gram,” says the CEO. “The path­way to com­mer­cial­iza­tion is now clear” af­ter the feed­back. And Moataze­di adds he’ll start scal­ing for a com­mer­cial launch­ing 2019.

He de­clined, though, to get in­to the specifics of the FDA’s ques­tions.

“We are pleased with the progress we con­tin­ue to make with the FDA, and this CRL con­firms our con­fi­dence in our clin­i­cal sub­mis­sion,” said Moataze­di in a state­ment. “De­fi­cien­cies cit­ed with­in the CRL are iso­lat­ed to CMC mat­ters and we ex­pect to re­spond com­pre­hen­sive­ly with­in 90 days. Over­all, we view these up­dates as pos­i­tive, which to­geth­er give us the line of sight nec­es­sary to build our com­mer­cial in­fra­struc­ture. We look for­ward to work­ing close­ly with the FDA and re­main com­mit­ted to bring­ing DWP-450 to mar­ket by spring 2019.”

UP­DAT­ED: A small, ob­scure biotech just won big with their IPO. In this mar­ket. Are you kid­ding me?

How could a small, largely unknown biotech that emerged from stealth mode just months ago with early-stage cancer programs jump onto Wall Street in the middle of a Category 6 financial hurricane and sail through with a $165 million IPO?

And what does that mean for the rest of the industry waiting to see just how much damage global lockdowns will wreak on clinical development?

The biotech is a company called Zentalis. The crew there nabbed an $85 million crossover round late last year — notably waiting 5 years before waving the numbers around to attract attention, according to my read of a FierceBiotech story. Perceptive joined in, but the syndicate was not in general the kind of marquee affair that gets tongues wagging.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Gilead CEO Daniel O'Day attends a meeting with the President and other biopharma leaders at the White House on March 2, 2020 (AP Photo)

Ramp­ing up glob­al pro­duc­tion of remde­sivir, Gilead CEO Dan O’Day de­tails plans to dis­trib­ute 1.5M dos­es to fight Covid-19 — for free

Gilead is still some days away from turning the card on its first round of data on remdesivir’s ability to fight severe cases of Covid-19, but the big biotech is ramping up an emergency supply of a million courses of therapy as it starts free distribution of the drug to tens of thousands of patients under their compassionate use and expanded access program as well as clinical trials.

In his latest open letter posted over the weekend, Gilead CEO Dan O’Day outlined how the company has been successful in cutting production time on remdesivir while repurposing some of their own facilities and turning to contract manufacturers to build a near-term supply of 1.5 million doses. They are still working on efficacy and dosing, but that supply could cover 140,000 courses of treatment. That supply, he added, would be more widely available following a potential approval.

Bob Nelsen at the Milken Institute Global Conference on April 29, 2019 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Michael Kovac/Getty Images)

ARCH chief Bob Nelsen has $1.5B to prove 2 sim­ple points: ‘We’re in the most in­no­v­a­tive time ever’ and in­vestors are stay­ing

ARCH co-founder and managing director Bob Nelsen has a well known yen for the home run swing, betting big on potentially transformative meds and tech and the biotech teams he helps bring together. He thrives and bleeds on the cutting edge. And now Nelsen and the ARCH group have debuted 2 big funds to prove that this is the time for the best of biotech to shine — deadly pandemic be damned.

Two new funds, ARCH Venture Fund X and ARCH Venture Fund X Overage, gathered a combined $1.46 billion. And that’s a record. ARCH Venture Fund IX and ARCH Venture Fund IX Overage closed in 2016 with a combined $1.1 billion. ARCH Venture Fund VIII and ARCH Venture Fund VIII Overage closed in 2014 with a combined $560 million.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Have a new drug that promis­es to fight Covid-19? The FDA promis­es fast ac­tion but some de­vel­op­ers aren't hap­py

After providing an emergency approval to use malaria drugs against coronavirus with little actual evidence of their efficacy or safety in that setting, the FDA has already proven that it has set aside the gold standard when it comes to the pandemic. And now regulators have spelled out a new approach to speeding development that promises immediate responses in no uncertain terms — promising a program offering the ultimate high-speed pathway to Covid-19 drug approvals.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Once fu­ri­ous over No­var­tis’ da­ta ma­nip­u­la­tion scan­dal, the FDA now says it’s noth­ing they need to take ac­tion on

Back in the BP era — Before Pandemic — the FDA ripped Novartis for its decision to keep the agency in the dark about manipulated data used in its application for Zolgensma while its marketing application for the gene therapy was under review.

Civil and criminal sanctions were being discussed, the agency noted in a rare broadside at one of the world’s largest pharma companies. Notable lawmakers cheered the angry regulators on, urging the FDA to make an example of Novartis, which fielded Zolgensma at $2.1 million — the current record for a one-off therapy.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Covid-19 roundup: GSK, Am­gen tai­lor R&D work to fit the coro­n­avirus age; Doud­na's ge­nomics crew launch­es di­ag­nos­tic lab

You can add Amgen and GSK to the list of deep-pocket drug R&D players who are tailoring their pipeline work to fit a new age of coronavirus.

Following in the footsteps of a lineup of big players like Eli Lilly — which has suspended patient recruitment for drug studies — Amgen and GSK have opted to take a more tailored approach. Amgen is intent on circling the wagons around key studies that are already fully enrolled, and GSK has the red light on new studies while the pandemic plays out.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

In a stun­ning set­back, Amarin los­es big patent fight over Vas­cepa IP. And its high-fly­ing stock crash­es to earth

Amarin’s shares $AMRN were blitzed Monday evening, losing billions in value as reports spread that the company had lost its high-profile effort to keep its Vascepa patents protected from generic drugmakers.

Amarin had been fighting to keep key patents under lock and key — and away from generic rivals — for another 10 years, but District Court Judge Miranda Du in Las Vegas ruled against the biotech. She ruled that:
(A)ll the Asserted Claims are invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C.§ 103. Thus, the Court finds in favor of Defendants on Plaintiff’s remaining infringementclaim, and in their favor on their counterclaims asserting the invalidity of the AssertedClaims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Aaron Royston, venBio

In­vest­ing in the time of coro­n­avirus: the good, the bad and the hope­ful, as biotech VC firms close funds worth $3B

Apart from disrupting biopharma R&D and regulatory timelines, the coronavirus pandemic has inevitably ravaged financial markets and eroded investor risk appetite. Investing in the time of coronavirus feels reckless, but if biotech venture funds are any indication, the time is ripe.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Drug dis­cov­ery in the age of coro­n­avirus

Developing new drugs is incredibly hard. That’s why, despite superhuman efforts from the industry, we’re still looking at 12-18 months minimum before we can realistically hope for a vaccine for Covid-19, and probably months before there’s a proven viable drug treatment.

But our increasing ability to begin to industrialize the drug discovery and development process through an engineering approach means that we have more hope for speeding up this process than ever before — and not just to defeat coronavirus, but to benefit the development of all new medicines in the future.