Law­mak­ers halt push for drug prices in TV ads

In an ef­fort to get the first set of FY 2019 ap­pro­pri­a­tions bills to the Pres­i­dent’s desk, US House lead­ers scrapped a bi­par­ti­san amend­ment that would have re­quired drug­mak­ers to in­clude list prices in di­rect-to-con­sumer (DTC) tele­vi­sion ads.

Chuck Grass­ley

The amend­ment — spon­sored by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Chuck Grass­ley (R-IA) — was of­fered and sub­se­quent­ly with­drawn dur­ing a joint con­fer­ence com­mit­tee of the House and Sen­ate, de­spite pass­ing the Sen­ate last month. The move was fol­lowed by fin­ger point­ing.

Richard Durbin

The amend­ment forms part of an on­go­ing ef­fort to com­bat drug prices through greater trans­paren­cy. It is al­so a pil­lar to the Trump ad­min­is­tra­tion’s re­cent “blue­print” on drug prices.

“For some rea­son, some­one on the oth­er side is try­ing to block this com­mon sense, tru­ly bi­par­ti­san pol­i­cy,” Durbin said dur­ing the joint hear­ing. “When are we go­ing to stand up to Big Phar­ma and ac­tu­al­ly do some­thing about sky high pre­scrip­tion drug prices? Trans­paren­cy in ad­ver­tis­ing is the very least Con­gress can do,” Durbin added.

Durbin took to Twit­ter af­ter the joint hear­ing, cit­ing “Big Phar­ma and their rep­re­sen­ta­tives in Con­gress” as the “on­ly group who op­posed” the amend­ment.

Amend­ment Com­ments

The Durbin-Grass­ley amend­ment, which was not in­clud­ed in the draft fund­ing bill that was re­leased in June, did not make it through the ne­go­ti­a­tion agree­ment be­cause to “too many of our friends across the ta­ble here, it was con­tro­ver­sial,” Sen. Richard Shel­by (R-AL) said.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) echoed Shel­by’s com­ments and con­cerns dur­ing the joint hear­ing.

The fact that it is a Durbin-Grass­ley amend­ment that the Sen­ate al­ready passed “speaks to how worth­while it is” and “peo­ple ought to know” how much pre­scrip­tion drugs are go­ing to cost in DTC ad­ver­tise­ments, said Leahy. In the in­ter­est of re­turn­ing to reg­u­lar or­der, Leahy ul­ti­mate­ly sided with Shel­by in op­po­si­tion to in­clud­ing the amend­ment in the joint con­fer­ence re­port.

Durbin and Grass­ley ex­pressed dis­ap­point­ment with the de­ci­sion to drop the pro­pos­al for now at least, ar­gu­ing against the char­ac­ter­i­za­tion of the amend­ment as a “poi­son pill rid­er.”

It was re­moved “in a last-minute, back­room deal,” Grass­ley said, point­ing to those that had showed sup­port. These in­clude the Amer­i­can Hos­pi­tal As­so­ci­a­tion, the Fed­er­a­tion of Amer­i­can Hos­pi­tals and the Cam­paign for Sus­tain­able Rx Pric­ing (CSRxP), among sev­er­al oth­ers.

The bill “aban­dons the re­al bi­par­ti­san progress the Sen­ate and the Trump Ad­min­is­tra­tion made to hold Big Phar­ma ac­count­able for out-of-con­trol drug prices and give pa­tients the in­for­ma­tion they need to make smart de­ci­sions about their health care,” said CSRxP.

The Durbin-Grass­ley amend­ment pre­vi­ous­ly drew ire from in­dus­try trade as­so­ci­a­tions.

“FDA should not pur­sue any re­quired dis­clo­sure of list prices in di­rect-to-con­sumer phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal ad­ver­tis­ing,” PhRMA said in its Ju­ly com­ments to HHS on Trump’s drug pric­ing blue­print. “Such a re­quire­ment could con­fuse pa­tients since the list price of­ten does not rep­re­sent what they would ac­tu­al­ly be re­quired to pay” and it “could al­so have the un­in­tend­ed and harm­ful con­se­quence of de­ter­ring pa­tients from seek­ing care.”

First pub­lished here. Reg­u­la­to­ry Fo­cus is the flag­ship on­line pub­li­ca­tion of the Reg­u­la­to­ry Af­fairs Pro­fes­sion­als So­ci­ety (RAPS), the largest glob­al or­ga­ni­za­tion of and for those in­volved with the reg­u­la­tion of health­care and re­lat­ed prod­ucts, in­clud­ing med­ical de­vices, phar­ma­ceu­ti­cals, bi­o­log­ics and nu­tri­tion­al prod­ucts. Email for more in­for­ma­tion.

John Hood [file photo]

UP­DATE: Cel­gene and the sci­en­tist who cham­pi­oned fe­dra­tinib's rise from Sanofi's R&D grave­yard win FDA OK

Six years after Sanofi gave it up for dead, the FDA has approved the myelofibrosis drug fedratinib, now owned by Celgene.

The drug will be sold as Inrebic, and will soon land in the portfolio at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is finalizing a deal to acquire Celgene.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: AveX­is sci­en­tif­ic founder was axed — and No­var­tis names a new CSO in wake of an ethics scan­dal

Now at the center of a storm of controversy over its decision to keep its knowledge of manipulated data hidden from regulators during an FDA review, Novartis CEO Vas Narasimhan has found a longtime veteran in the ranks to head the scientific work underway at AveXis, where the incident occurred. And the scientific founder has hit the exit.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Ab­b­Vie gets its FDA OK for JAK in­hibitor upadac­i­tinib, but don’t look for this one to hit ex­ecs’ lofty ex­pec­ta­tions

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.

The top 10 fran­chise drugs in bio­phar­ma his­to­ry will earn a to­tal of $1.4T (tril­lion) by 2024 — what does that tell us?

Just in case you were looking for more evidence of just how important Amgen’s patent win on Enbrel is for the company and its investors, EvaluatePharma has come up with a forward-looking consensus estimate on what the list of top 10 drugs will look like in 2024.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: Sci­en­tist-CEO ac­cused of im­prop­er­ly us­ing con­fi­den­tial in­fo from uni­corn Alec­tor

The executive team at Alector $ALEC has a bone to pick with scientific co-founder Asa Abeliovich. Their latest quarterly rundown has this brief note buried inside:

On June 18, 2019, we initiated a confidential arbitration proceeding against Dr. Asa Abeliovich, our former consulting co-founder, related to alleged breaches of his consulting agreement and the improper use of our confidential information that he learned during the course of rendering services to us as our consulting Chief Scientific Officer/Chief Innovation Officer. We are in the early stage of this arbitration proceeding and are unable to assess or provide any assurances regarding its possible outcome.

There’s no explicit word in the filing on what kind of confidential info was involved, but the proceeding got started 2 days ahead of Abeliovich’s IPO.

Abeliovich, formerly a tenured associate professor at Columbia, is a top scientist in the field of neurodegeneration, which is where Alector is targeted. More recently, he’s also helped start up Prevail Therapeutics as the CEO, which raised $125 million in an IPO. And there he’s planning on working on new gene therapies that target genetically defined subpopulations of Parkinson’s disease. Followup programs target Gaucher disease, frontotemporal dementia and synucleinopathies.

But this time Abeliovich is the CEO rather than a founding scientist. And some of their pipeline overlaps with Alector’s.

Abeliovich and Prevail, though, aren’t taking this one lying down.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Chi­na has be­come a CEO-lev­el pri­or­i­ty for multi­na­tion­al phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal com­pa­nies: the trend and the im­pli­ca­tions

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.

As dis­as­ter struck, Ab­b­Vie’s Rick Gon­za­lez swooped in on Al­ler­gan with an of­fer Brent Saun­ders couldn’t say no to

Early March was a no good, awful, terrible time for Allergan CEO Brent Saunders. His big lead drug had imploded in a Phase III disaster and activists were after his hide — or at least his chairman’s title — as the stock price continued a steady droop that had eviscerated share value for investors.

But it was a perfect time for AbbVie CEO Rick Gonzalez to pick up the phone and ask Saunders if he’d like to consider a “strategic” deal.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

CEO Pascal Soriot via Getty Images

As­traZeneca's jug­ger­naut PARP play­er Lyn­parza scoops up an­oth­er dom­i­nant win in PhI­II as the FDA adds a 'break­through' for Calquence

AstraZeneca’s oncology R&D group under José Baselga keeps churning out hits.

Wednesday morning the pharma giant and their partners at Merck parted the curtains on a successful readout for their Phase III PAOLA-1 study, demonstrating statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival for women with ovarian cancer in a first-line maintenance setting who added their PARP Lynparza to Avastin. This is their second late-stage success in ovarian cancer, which will help stave off rivals like GSK.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

ICER blasts FDA, PTC and Sarep­ta for high prices on DMD drugs Em­flaza, Ex­ondys 51

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.