Long jour­ney for DBV peanut patch ends in re­jec­tion by FDA

DBV Tech­nolo­gies’ long and wind­ing saga with the FDA has end­ed — for now, at least — with a CRL for their peanut al­ler­gy skin patch.

The re­jec­tion comes 21 months af­ter the com­pa­ny first filed for ap­proval. At the time, the French biotech was in a two-way race with Cal­i­for­nia’s Aim­mune to pro­duce the first FDA-ap­proved treat­ment for peanut al­ler­gy. But since then Aim­mune cleared that hur­dle, while DBV, af­ter a with­draw­al and re­sub­mis­sion, in­di­cat­ed that com­mu­ni­ca­tion be­tween them and reg­u­la­tors had bro­ken down.  In June, the com­pa­ny be­gan cut­ting pro­grams and em­ploy­ees.

As de­tailed in DBV’s press re­lease, the con­cerns raised in the CRL may take more than a few months to rem­e­dy. On top of CMC is­sues, DBV said that the agency al­so had ques­tions about how the ad­he­sive­ness, or lack there­of, of their skin patch could af­fect ef­fi­ca­cy.  They want­ed DBV to mod­i­fy the patch and then con­duct a new hu­man fac­tor study and pro­vide new clin­i­cal da­ta.

Daniel Tassé

CEO Daniel Tassé struck a con­cil­ia­to­ry tone, adding they plan to meet with the FDA to dis­cuss re­sub­mis­sion be­fore up­dat­ing in­vestors. The com­pa­ny had €225.9 mil­lion – $266.4 mil­lion – in cash as of June 30. They did not in­di­cate how much run­way that gave them, but the re­struc­tur­ing plan ini­ti­at­ed in June was in­tend­ed to keep them sol­vent through the first quar­ter of 2021.

“We plan to ful­ly col­lab­o­rate with the FDA with re­gards to the out­stand­ing is­sues and be­lieve that the EPIT patch tech­nol­o­gy plat­form lends it­self well to po­ten­tial mod­i­fi­ca­tions to en­hance patch func­tion­al­i­ty,” he said in a state­ment, us­ing the brand­ed name for their patch tech­nol­o­gy.

The com­pa­ny’s stock {DB­VT}, hav­ing al­ready tum­bled from $19.83 to $6.70 this year, fell to $4.74 on the news.

Trou­ble for DBV be­gan in De­cem­ber of 2018, when the com­pa­ny with­drew their first BLA, say­ing reg­u­la­tors in­di­cat­ed their ini­tial ap­pli­ca­tion lacked “suf­fi­cient de­tail re­gard­ing da­ta on man­u­fac­tur­ing pro­ce­dures and qual­i­ty con­trols.” That set­back gave Aim­mune a win­dow to file for their peanut pow­der cap­sule, lat­er known as Pal­forzia, al­low­ing it to be­come the first FDA-ap­proved peanut al­ler­gy ther­a­py in Jan­u­ary.

Nei­ther ther­a­pies are cures. Rather, they try to get kids to build tol­er­ance to peanuts by re­peat­ed ex­po­sure — through es­ca­lat­ing dos­es of pow­der in Aim­mune’s case and through es­ca­lat­ing dos­es of their “Vi­askin” patch in DBV’s case. Ear­ly da­ta point­ed to Aim­mune hav­ing the more ef­fec­tive but per­haps less tol­er­a­ble ther­a­py, as DBV failed to reach sta­tis­ti­cal sig­nif­i­cance in late-stage tri­als be­fore head­ing to the FDA.

DBV re-filed last Au­gust and the FDA ac­cept­ed the sub­mis­sion in Oc­to­ber, set­ting up an ad­vi­so­ry com­mit­tee hear­ing in May and a PDU­FA date in Au­gust. In March, though, DBV dis­closed the FDA had con­cerns that kids could eas­i­ly scratch off their patch, in­ter­fer­ing with its over­all ef­fi­ca­cy, and that the agency had can­celed their ad­vi­so­ry com­mit­tee hear­ing.

The com­pa­ny sub­mit­ted new da­ta to as­suage those con­cerns. In June, though, they an­nounced that they had yet to hear back from the FDA and, fac­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ty of re­jec­tion in Au­gust, were lay­ing off staff and cut­ting pro­grams to stay above wa­ter long-term.

That an­nounce­ment di­vid­ed an­a­lysts. SVB Leerink’s Joseph Schwartz called it “a sticky sit­u­a­tion.” Baird’s Bri­an Sko­r­ney, who had been bull­ish on Aim­mune, pre­pared fu­ner­al rites. “At this point, we view DBV as ef­fec­tive­ly dead in the wa­ter,” he wrote in a note fol­low­ing the an­nounce­ment.

The re­jec­tion means Aim­mune will have a clear path to take the peanut al­ler­gy mar­ket, but the com­pa­ny is fac­ing its own is­sues. They had planned ex­ten­sive train­ing ses­sions with al­ler­gists to help launch Pal­forzia, but Covid-19 stunt­ed those ef­forts. The com­pa­ny said last week they re­port­ed ze­ro Pal­forzia sales in Q2. Their stock is down to $13.60 from a post-ap­proval high of over $36 in Jan­u­ary, al­though Sko­r­ney is still con­fi­dent they’re worth far more.

“We be­lieve in­ter­est in the prod­uct re­mains high, were en­cour­aged to hear man­age­ment’s com­ments sur­round­ing an uptick in new starts in Ju­ly,” he said in a note last week. “That be­ing said, we are re­duc­ing our price tar­get to $47 as we be­lieve near-term COVID head­winds could con­tin­ue to ham­per the launch, in­creas­ing the po­ten­tial for a di­lu­tive cap­i­tal raise.”

Covid-19 roundup: Eu­rope pur­chas­es 80M dos­es of Mod­er­na's vac­cine; CO­V­AXX se­cures $2.8B in emerg­ing mar­ket pre-or­ders

With the announcement of its vaccine efficacy data last week, Moderna is starting to line up customers for its Covid-19 mRNA jabs.

The Massachusetts-based biotech announced Wednesday it has agreed to sell an initial round of 80 million doses to the European Commission, with the option to double the amount to 160 million. Once the member states rubber stamp the approval, the deal will be finalized.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,200+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Pascal Soriot (AP Images)

UP­DAT­ED: As­traZeneca, Ox­ford on the de­fen­sive as skep­tics dis­miss 70% av­er­age ef­fi­ca­cy for Covid-19 vac­cine

On the third straight Monday that the world wakes up to positive vaccine news, AstraZeneca and Oxford are declaring a new Phase III milestone in the fight against the pandemic. Not everyone is convinced they will play a big part, though.

With an average efficacy of 70%, the headline number struck analysts as less impressive than the 95% and 94.5% protection that Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have boasted in the past two weeks, respectively. But the British partners say they have several other bright spots going for their candidate. One of the two dosing regimens tested in Phase III showed a better profile, bringing efficacy up to 90%; the adenovirus vector-based vaccine requires minimal refrigeration, which may mean easier distribution; and AstraZeneca has pledged to sell it at a fraction of the price that the other two vaccine developers are charging.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,200+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Jason Kelly, Ginkgo Bioworks CEO (Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Af­ter Ko­dak de­ba­cle, US lends $1.1B to a syn­thet­ic bi­ol­o­gy com­pa­ny and their big Covid-19, mR­NA plans

In mid-August, as Kodak’s $765 million government-backed push into drug manufacturing slowly fell apart in national headlines, Ginkgo Bioworks CEO Jason Kelly got a message from his company’s government liaison: HHS wanted to know if they, too, might want a loan.

The government’s decision to lend Kodak three quarters of a billion dollars raised eyebrows because Kodak had never made drugs before. But Ginkgo, while not a manufacturing company, had spent the last decade refining new ways to produce materials inside cells and building automated facilities across Boston.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,200+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

FDA hands Liq­uidia and Re­vance a CRL and de­fer­ral, re­spec­tive­ly, as Covid-19 cre­ates in­spec­tion chal­lenge

Two biotechs said they got turned away by the FDA on Wednesday, in part due to pandemic-related travel restrictions.

North Carolina-based Liquidia Technologies was handed a CRL for its lead pulmonary arterial hypertension drug, citing the need for more CMC data and on-site pre-approval inspections, which the FDA hasn’t been able to conduct due to travel restrictions. The agency also deferred its decision on Revance Therapeutics’ BLA for its frown line treatment, because it needs to inspect the company’s northern California manufacturing facility. The action, Revance emphasized, was not a CRL.

The ad­u­canum­ab co­nun­drum: The PhI­II failed a clear reg­u­la­to­ry stan­dard, but no one is cer­tain what that means any­more at the FDA

Eighteen days ago, virtually all of the outside experts on an FDA adcomm got together to mug the agency’s Billy Dunn and the Biogen team when they presented their upbeat assessment on aducanumab. But here we are, more than 2 weeks later, and the ongoing debate over that Alzheimer’s drug’s fate continues unabated.

Instead of simply ruling out any chance of an approval, the logical conclusion based on what we heard during that session, a series of questionable approvals that preceded the controversy over the agency’s recent EUA decisions has come back to haunt the FDA, where the power of precedent is leaving an opening some experts believe can still be exploited by the big biotech.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

John Maraganore, Alnylam CEO (Scott Eisen/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

UP­DAT­ED: Al­ny­lam gets the green light from the FDA for drug #3 — and CEO John Maraganore is ready to roll

Score another early win at the FDA for Alnylam.

The FDA put out word today that the agency has approved its third drug, lumasiran, for primary hyperoxaluria type 1, better known as PH1. The news comes just 4 days after the European Commission took the lead in offering a green light.

An ultra rare genetic condition, Alnylam CEO John Maraganore says there are only some 1,000 to 1,700 patients in the US and Europe at any particular point. The patients, mostly kids, suffer from an overproduction of oxalate in the liver that spurs the development of kidney stones, right through to end stage kidney disease.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,200+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Leonard Schleifer, Regeneron CEO (Andrew Harnik/AP)

Trail­ing Eli Lil­ly by 12 days, Re­gen­eron gets the FDA OK for their Covid-19 an­ti­body cock­tail

A month and a half after becoming the experimental treatment of choice for a newly diagnosed president, Regeneron’s antibody cocktail has received emergency use authorization from the FDA. It will be used to treat non-hospitalized Covid-19 patients who are at high-risk of progressing.

Although the Rgeneron drug is not the first antibody treatment authorized by the FDA, the news comes as a significant milestone for a company and a treatment scientists have watched closely since the outbreak began.

News brief­ing: FDA re­quests new tri­al for Reata's Friedre­ich's atax­ia pro­gram; J&J's Trem­fya picks up ex­pand­ed la­bel in Eu­rope

Three months after Reata Pharmaceuticals suggested its Friedreich’s ataxia program omaveloxolone could be delayed, the company revealed that is indeed going to be the case.

Reata $RETA shares took a nosedive Wednesday after the biotech revealed that the FDA said supplemental data for its pivotal trial did not strengthen the case for approval. As a result, the drug is likely to need another study before the FDA takes up the case.

Jef­frey Hat­field takes over from Diego Mi­ralles as CEO of Vi­vid­ion; Drag­on­fly scores a new ex­ec with COO Alex Lu­gov­skoy

→ San Diego protein degradation startup Vividion Therapeutics has made a change at the top with Jeffrey Hatfield taking the helm as CEO, replacing Diego Miralles six months after Roche forked over $135 million to collaborate with Vividion on their small molecule degraders. Hatfield is chairman of the board at miRagen Therapeutics and previously held the CEO job at Zafgen and Vitae Pharmaceuticals. He also had a series of leadership roles at Bristol Myers Squibb from 1996-2004, including SVP, immunology and virology divisions.