It’s been a big day for Jun­shi Bio­sciences as it nabs Chi­na’s first snap ap­proval for a home­grown PD-1 af­ter re­port­ed­ly clos­ing a $394 mil­lion IPO in Hong Kong.

Con­di­tion­al­ly ap­proved un­der pri­or­i­ty re­view, tori­pal­imab is in­di­cat­ed for fast-grow­ing cas­es of melanoma, ac­cord­ing to the Na­tion­al Med­ical Prod­ucts Ad­min­is­tra­tion.

“Clin­i­cal tri­al re­sults of this prod­uct shows that in treat­ing pa­tients with un­re­sectable or metasta­t­ic melanoma who have failed pre­vi­ous sys­temic ther­a­pies, it reach­es an ob­jec­tive re­sponse rate of 17.3%, dis­ease con­trol rate of 57.5%, and 1-year sur­vival rate of 69.3%,” the NM­PA writes in a note. “The prod­uct’s mar­ket­ing ap­proval has a pos­i­tive im­pact on the se­lec­tion of clin­i­cal drugs for can­cer pa­tients.”

With 68 check­points crowd­ing the pipeline, this is like­ly to be first of many OKs from Chi­na’s rapid­ly evolv­ing reg­u­la­to­ry agency. Da­ta provider Pharm­Cube pre­vi­ous­ly told End­points News that In­novent Bi­o­log­ics, BeiGene (Cel­gene’s part­ner) and Jiang­su Hen­grui are all be­ing tipped for a mar­ket launch in the first half of 2019.

The ap­proval, which took nine months to process and tech­ni­cal­ly goes to Jun­shi’s sub­sidiary TopAl­liance, fol­lows those of Op­di­vo and Keytru­da, the two pi­o­neers in the field that’s been dom­i­nat­ing sales glob­al­ly.

While the ma­jor­i­ty of Jun­shi’s IPO pro­ceeds will go to­ward the con­tin­ued de­vel­op­ment and com­mer­cial­iza­tion of PD-1, parts will fund its oth­er pro­grams, in­clud­ing a PC­SK9 drug and a Hu­mi­ra biosim­i­lar, ac­cord­ing to an ear­li­er fil­ing.

Pric­ing at the bot­tom of the range, Jun­shi are sell­ing their shares at $2.48 (HK$19.38) each, Reuters re­port­ed. It’s set to be­gin trad­ing on De­cem­ber 24.

CI­CC is the sole spon­sor for the float while Cred­it Su­isse acts as a joint bookrun­ner.

It’s official. Memorial Sloan Kettering has picked a brain cancer expert as its new physician-in-chief and CMO, replacing José Baselga, who left under a cloud after being singled out by The New York Times and ProPublica for failing to properly air his lucrative industry ties.

His replacement, who now will be in charge of MSK’s cutting-edge research work as well as the cancer care delivered by hundreds of practitioners, is Lisa M. DeAngelis. DeAngelis had been chair of the neurology department and co-founder of MSK’s brain tumor center and was moved in to the acting CMO role in the wake of Baselga’s departure.

More than two years ago Ritter Pharmaceuticals managed to find enough silver lining in its Phase IIb/III study — after missing the top-line mark — to propel its lactose intolerance toward a confirmatory trial. But as it turned out, the enthusiasm only set the biotech and its investors up to be sorely disappointed.

This time around there’s little left to salvage. Not only did RP-G28 fail to beat placebo in reducing lactose intolerance symptoms, patients in the treatment group actually averaged a smaller improvement. On a composite score measuring symptoms like abdominal pain, cramping, bloating and gas, patients given the drug had a mean reduction of 3.159 while the placebo cohort saw a 3.420 drop on average (one-sided p-value = 0.0106).

An early-stage update on Adverum Biotechnologies’ intravitreal gene therapy has triggered investor concern, after patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) saw their vision deteriorate, despite signs that the treatment is improving retinal anatomy.

Adverum, on Wednesday, unveiled 24-week data from the OPTIC trial of its experimental therapy, ADVM-022, in six patients who have been administered with one dose of the therapy. On average, patients in the trial had severe disease with an average of 6.2 anti-VEGF injections in the eight months prior to screening and an average annualized injection frequency of 9.3 injections.

Too often, Alex Arfaei arrived too late. 

An analyst at BMO Capital Markets, he’d meet with biotech or pharmaceutical heads for their IPO or secondary funding and his brain, trained on a biology degree and six years at Merck and Endo, would spring with questions: Why this biomarker? Why this design? Why not this endpoint? Not that he could do anything about it. These execs were coming for clinical money; their decisions had been made and finalized long ago.