For­eign threats to NIH re­search: Sen­ate Fi­nance Com­mit­tee digs in

Chi­na, Rus­sia and Iran were sin­gled out in a Sen­ate Fi­nance Com­mit­tee hear­ing on Wednes­day as coun­tries that are look­ing to ei­ther un­der­mine or usurp sci­en­tif­ic re­search con­duct­ed with US tax­pay­er funds.

Chuck Grass­ley Twit­ter

Com­mit­tee Chair­man Chuck Grass­ley (R-IA) made clear that Chi­na is “by far the most pro­lif­ic of­fend­er,” of­fer­ing the ex­am­ple of at­tempts by Chi­nese re­searchers to steal ge­net­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied corn seeds in Iowa and send them back to Chi­na.

“Re­searchers who are se­cret­ly sup­port­ed by a for­eign gov­ern­ment while work­ing on US re­search projects can be more sus­cep­ti­ble to the in­flu­ence and con­trol of the for­eign par­ent. We must know who is fi­nan­cial­ly sup­port­ing re­searchers to bet­ter un­der­stand whether they might be more ded­i­cat­ed to se­cur­ing the in­ter­ests of an ad­ver­sary than to rig­or­ous sci­en­tif­ic and med­ical ad­vance­ment,” Grass­ley said.

As part of ef­forts to com­bat such abus­es, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said he will in­tro­duce a bill next week, called “Se­cure Our Re­search Act,” which would es­tab­lish an in­ter­a­gency work­ing group to set up a com­pli­ance frame­work to pro­tect fed­er­al­ly fund­ed re­search from for­eign in­ter­fer­ence, es­pi­onage and ex­fil­tra­tion.

Michael Schmoy­er HHS

Capt. Michael Schmoy­er, di­rec­tor of the Of­fice of Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty (ONS) at the De­part­ment of Health and Hu­man Ser­vices (HHS), ex­plained the ex­tent of the prob­lem to the com­mit­tee. Since the spring of 2017, ONS be­came “acute­ly aware of spe­cif­ic chal­lenges re­lat­ing to the threat of for­eign in­flu­ences on HHS, and specif­i­cal­ly NIH, re­search in­tegri­ty. We be­came in­volved in two whole-of-gov­ern­ment work­ing groups, led by the FBI, to ad­dress the chal­lenges since some for­eign gov­ern­ments have ini­ti­at­ed sys­tem­at­ic pro­grams to un­du­ly in­flu­ence and cap­i­tal­ize on U.S.–con­duct­ed re­search, in­clud­ing that fund­ed by NIH.”

More specif­i­cal­ly, Louis Ro­di, deputy as­sis­tant di­rec­tor of home­land se­cu­ri­ty in­ves­ti­ga­tions in the De­part­ment of Home­land Se­cu­ri­ty, point­ed to Chi­na, Iran and Rus­sia as be­ing in­volved in the largest num­ber of on­go­ing in­ves­ti­ga­tions re­lat­ed to ei­ther the trans­mis­sion of tech­ni­cal da­ta from the US or the trans­fer of for­eign na­tion­als to the US.

Louis Ro­di LinkedIn

“As of May 2019, there are 357,863 F-1 [visa] Chi­nese stu­dents in the Unit­ed States with 181,980 such stu­dents en­rolled in STEM-re­lat­ed aca­d­e­m­ic pro­grams at U.S. in­sti­tu­tions. There are al­so 11,323 F-1 Iran­ian stu­dents and 6,196 F-1 Russ­ian stu­dents, with the re­spec­tive STEM stu­dent break­down of 9,057 for Iran and 2,008 for Rus­sia,” Ro­di wrote in writ­ten tes­ti­mo­ny.

He of­fered the hy­po­thet­i­cal ex­am­ple of an Iran­ian stu­dent com­ing to the US to study civ­il en­gi­neer­ing, but in re­al­i­ty that stu­dent might be work­ing to study con­crete to aid the Iran­ian nu­clear pro­gram. “So that would be a con­cern to us, us­ing our tech to build these bunkers,” he said. He al­so of­fered the ex­am­ple of an Iran­ian stu­dent com­ing to the US to learn how to weld ti­ta­ni­um for ag­ing Iran­ian air­planes.

Les Hol­lie NIH

Les Hol­lie, chief of in­ves­tiga­tive op­er­a­tions at HHS’ Of­fice of In­spec­tor Gen­er­al, ex­plained how he’s over­seen 16 al­le­ga­tions of non­com­pli­ance, which dealt with prin­ci­pal in­ves­ti­ga­tors that failed to re­veal con­nec­tions to for­eign gov­ern­ments.

In writ­ten tes­ti­mo­ny, Hol­lie of­fered two ex­am­ples of re­cent­ly re­solved re­search in­tegri­ty in­ves­tiga­tive cas­es: One in­volved a doc­tor who worked in a lab­o­ra­to­ry at Iowa State Uni­ver­si­ty, which re­ceived re­search grants for an ex­per­i­men­tal HIV/AIDS vac­cine. The doc­tor fal­si­fied sci­en­tif­ic da­ta to make it ap­pear an ex­per­i­men­tal HIV/AIDS vac­cine neu­tral­ized, or con­trolled, the HIV/AIDS virus in rab­bits, and he con­t­a­m­i­nat­ed rab­bit blood sam­ples with hu­man an­ti­bod­ies to make it ap­pear the rab­bits pro­duced neu­tral­iz­ing an­ti­bod­ies against the HIV/AIDS virus. The da­ta were used in a grant ap­pli­ca­tion and progress re­ports to NIH. In 2015, the doc­tor was sen­tenced to 57 months in fed­er­al prison and re­quired to pay more than $7 mil­lion in resti­tu­tion.

Lawrence Tabak NIH

The oth­er ex­am­ple was a doc­tor who found­ed two com­pa­nies, Gen­Phar and Vax­i­ma, to per­form re­search and pro­duce vac­cines for dis­eases such as Ebo­la, Mar­burg virus and Dengue virus. The com­pa­nies re­ceived NIH funds for biode­fense re­search and vac­cine de­vel­op­ment, but ac­tu­al­ly used the funds for oth­er pur­pos­es, in­clud­ing the con­struc­tion of a com­mer­cial of­fice build­ing and to pay lob­by­ists and oth­ers who were seek­ing to se­cure more fed­er­al fund­ing on the doc­tor’s be­half. In 2017, the doc­tor was sen­tenced to 70 months in fed­er­al prison and or­dered to pay over $3 mil­lion in resti­tu­tion.

Lawrence Tabak, prin­ci­pal deputy di­rec­tor at NIH, added: “The num­bers are small but the prob­lem is im­por­tant. We’ve been work­ing with 61 in­sti­tu­tions, and that num­ber will un­doubt­ed­ly in­crease.”

But Tabak al­so point­ed out how this is­sue is not al­ways black and white and there are sit­u­a­tions in which “hon­est mis­takes were made by re­search in­ves­ti­ga­tors who were un­aware of the re­quire­ment to dis­close oth­er fund­ing sources (both do­mes­tic and in­ter­na­tion­al) or af­fil­i­a­tions with for­eign en­ti­ties.”

Oth­er sen­a­tors and wit­ness­es al­so not­ed the ad­vance­ments made by for­eign-born sci­en­tists in the US.

Sen. Lamar Alexan­der (R-TN) said in a state­ment: “Sci­en­tists from oth­er coun­tries have played an im­por­tant role in re­search fund­ed by the Unit­ed States gov­ern­ment—since 2000, 33 Amer­i­cans who were born in oth­er coun­tries have won No­bel prizes in chem­istry, med­i­cine and physics. Un­for­tu­nate­ly, at­tempts by for­eign gov­ern­ments to in­flu­ence our fed­er­al­ly fund­ed re­search and steal in­tel­lec­tu­al prop­er­ty from the Unit­ed States threat­ens the in­tegri­ty of sci­en­tif­ic re­search.”

Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) al­so ex­pressed “re­al con­cerns” with Chi­na steal­ing re­search and com­mer­cial­iz­ing that re­search. “Chi­na is open­ing its phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal mar­ket to bet­ter align with in­ter­na­tion­al stan­dards, but you look at the Made in Chi­na 2025: they don’t want to build an open mar­ket but to build a do­mes­tic mar­ket. Chi­na is grad­u­at­ing eight times more STEM grads than what we pro­duce in the US, and I think we’re un­der­es­ti­mat­ing the com­pet­i­tive threat,” he said.

The com­mit­tee was ex­pect­ed to hold a clas­si­fied brief­ing on the mat­ter Wednes­day af­ter­noon.


First pub­lished in Reg­u­la­to­ry Fo­cus™ by the Reg­u­la­to­ry Af­fairs Pro­fes­sion­als So­ci­ety, the largest glob­al or­ga­ni­za­tion of and for those in­volved with the reg­u­la­tion of health­care prod­ucts. Click here for more in­for­ma­tion.

Author

Zachary Brennan

managing editor, RAPS

Eli Lil­ly’s first PhI­II show­down for their $1.6B can­cer drug just flopped — what now?

When Eli Lilly plunked down $1.6 billion in cash to acquire Armo Biosciences a little more than a year ago, the stars seemed aligned in its favor. The jewel in the crown they were buying was pegilodecakin, which had cleared the proof-of-concept stage and was already in a Phase III trial for pancreatic cancer.

And that study just failed.

Lilly reported this morning that their cancer drug flopped on overall survival when added to FOLFOX (folinic acid, 5-FU, oxaliplatin), compared to FOLFOX alone among patients suffering from advanced pancreatic cancer.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 62,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Mi­rati preps its first look at their KRAS G12C con­tender, and they have to clear a high bar for suc­cess

If you’re a big KRAS G12C fan, mark your calendars for October 28 at 4:20 pm EDT.

That’s when Mirati $MRTX will unveil its first peek at the early clinical data available on MRTX849 in presentations at the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics in Boston.

Mirati has been experiencing the full effect of a rival’s initial success at targeting the G12C pocket found on KRAS, offering the biotech some support on the concept they’re after — and biotech fans a race to the top. Amgen made a big splash with its first positive snapshot on lung cancer, but deflated sky-high expectations as it proved harder to find similar benefits in other types of cancers.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 62,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

The FDA will hus­tle up an ex­pe­dit­ed re­view for As­traZeneca’s next shot at a block­buster can­cer drug fran­chise

AstraZeneca paid a hefty price to partner with Daiichi Sankyo on their experimental antibody drug conjugate for HER2 positive breast cancer. And they’ve been rewarded with a fast ride through the FDA, with a straight shot at creating another blockbuster oncology franchise.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 62,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Sean Parker, AP

Sean Park­er helps cre­ate a CRISPRed cell ther­a­py 2.0 play — and he’s got a high-pro­file set of lead­ers on the team

You can rack up one more high-profile debut effort in the wave of activity forming around cell therapy 2.0. It’s another appealing Bay Area group that’s attracted some of the top hands in the business to a multi-year effort to create a breakthrough. And they have $85 million in hand to make that first big step to the clinic.

Today it’s Ken Drazan and the team at South San Francisco-based ArsenalBio that are coming from behind the curtain for a public bow, backed by billionaire Sean Parker and a collection of investors that includes Beth Seidenberg’s new venture investment operation based in LA.
Drazan — a J&J Innovation vet with a long record of entrepreneurial endeavors — exited the stage in 2018 when his last mission ended as he stepped aside as president of Grail. It wasn’t long, though, before he was helping out with a business plan for ArsenalBio that revolved around the work of a large group of interconnected scientists supported by the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunology.
The biotech started by putting together an “arsenal” of technologies aimed at making cell therapies for cancer much, much better than the rather crude first-generation drugs that hit the market from Novartis and Kite.
Their drugs have become the baseline against which all others are being measured.
“The technology set we’re developing is independent of the chassis,” Drazan tells me. “It doesn’t have to be autologous (extracted from the patient) or allogeneic (off the shelf). It doesn’t have to be a T cell, it could be a B cell.” But they are starting out on the autologous side, where they have the most knowledge and insight into manufacturing techniques.
It also doesn’t have to be close to the clinic.
Drazan expects the biotech will be working its way through preclinical operations for “a few years,” with enough money from the $85 million launch round to get into humans.
By today’s superheated fundraising standards, that’s not a huge amount of cash. Lyell, another cell therapy 2.0 startup we featured last week, raised $600 million in a year, including a big chunk of cash from GlaxoSmithKline. Drazan is interested in dealmaking as well, but he also knows he has the cash necessary to support the company for a good run — a key part of what it takes to bring together a stellar team of top players.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 62,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Med­ical an­i­ma­tion: Mak­ing it eas­i­er for the site and the pa­tient to un­der­stand

Medical animation has in recent years become an increasingly important tool for conveying niche information to a varied audience, particularly to those audiences without expertise in the specialist area. Science programmes today, for example, have moved from the piece-to-camera of the university professor explaining how a complex disease mechanism works, to actually showing the viewer first-hand what it might look like to shrink ourselves down to the size of an ant’s foot, and travel inside the human body to witness these processes in action. Effectively communicating a complex disease pathophysiology, or the novel mechanism of action of a new drug, can be complex. This is especially difficult when the audience domain knowledge is limited or non-existent. Medical animation can help with this communication challenge in several ways.
Improved accessibility to visualisation
Visualisation is a core component of our ability to understand a concept. Ask 10 people to visualise an apple, and each will come up with a slightly different image, some apples smaller than others, some more round, some with bites taken. Acceptable, you say, we can move on to the next part of the story. Now ask 10 people to visualise how HIV’s capsid protein gets arranged into the hexamers and pentamers that form the viral capsid that holds HIV’s genetic material. This request may pose a challenge even to someone with some virology knowledge, and it is that inability to effectively visualise what is going on that holds us back from fully understanding the rest of the story. So how does medical animation help us to overcome this visualisation challenge?

Hal Barron, GSK's president of R&D and CSO, speaks to Endpoints News founder and editor John Carroll in London at Endpoints' #UKBIO19 summit on October 8, 2019

[Video] Cel­e­brat­ing tri­al fail­ures, chang­ing the cul­ture and al­ly­ing with Cal­i­for­nia dream­ers: R&D chief Hal Bar­ron talks about a new era at GSK

Last week I had a chance to sit down with Hal Barron at Endpoints’ #UKBIO19 summit to discuss his views on R&D at GSK, a topic that has been central to his life since he took the top research post close to 2 years ago. During the conversation, Barron talked about changing the culture at GSK, a move that involves several new approaches — one of which involves celebrating their setbacks as they shift resources to the most promising programs in the pipeline. Barron also discussed his new alliances in the Bay Area — including his collaboration pact with Lyell, which we covered here — frankly assesses the pluses and minuses of the UK drug development scene, and talks about his plans for making GSK a much more effective drug developer.

This is one discussion you won’t want to miss. Insider and Enterprise subscribers can log-in to watch the video.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

CSL ac­cus­es ri­val Pharm­ing of par­tic­i­pat­ing in a scheme to rip off IP on HAE while re­cruit­ing se­nior R&D staffer

Pharming has landed in the middle of a legal donnybrook after recruiting a senior executive from a rival R&D team at CSL. The Australian pharma giant slapped Pharming with a lawsuit alleging that the Dutch biotech’s new employee, Joseph Chiao, looted a large cache of proprietary documents as he hit the exit. And they want it all back.
Federal Judge Juan Sanchez in the Eastern District Pennsylvania court issued an injunction on Tuesday prohibiting Chiao from doing any work on HAE or primary immune deficiency in his new job and demanding that he return any material from CSL that he may have in his possession. And he wants Pharming to tell its employees not to ask for any information on the forbidden topics.
For its part, Pharming fired off an indignant response this morning denying any involvement in extracting any kind of IP from CSL, adding that it’s cooperating in the internal probe that CSL has underway.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 62,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: Alex­ion pays $930M to buy out Achillion and its promis­ing com­pan­ion drug to Soliris

After a series of stock-crunching setbacks over the years, Achillion enjoyed a turn in the sun a few weeks ago as the FDA blessed their lead drug danicopan (ACH-4471) — a complementary therapy for PNH patients taking Alexion’s Soliris — with a breakthrough drug designation after taking a look at some solid supporting Phase II data.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 62,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

From left to right: Lilian Kim, Associate Director Business Development; John Moller, CEO; Yooni Kim, Executive Director, Asia Operations; Michelle Park, Director South Korea Operations.

Novotech CRO sees 26% growth in Asia tri­al ac­tiv­i­ty from biotechs, but still plen­ty of ca­pac­i­ty

As the Asia-Pacific clinical trials sector continues to grow rapidly, Novotech the Asia-Pacific-based CRO is seeing biotech clinical activity up by 26%. But says there is still plenty of capacity in the region that features advanced medical facilities, supportive regulatory environments, and more than 2.3 billion people, largely treatment naïve, living in urban areas.

China, South Korea and Australia have the most studies registered as recruiting or about to recruit according to ClinicalTrials.Gov.