Mer­ck­'s Keytru­da builds a com­mand­ing lead in front­line lung can­cer with da­ta from two more land­mark tri­als

CHICA­GO — Mer­ck came to AS­CO as the dom­i­nant in­dus­try play­er in front­line lung can­cer. It’s go­ing to leave AS­CO with that rep in­tact — at the ex­pense of its heavy­weight ri­vals in the field still play­ing catch-up.

Roy Baynes

In two key stud­ies out this morn­ing, the phar­ma gi­ant spelled out pos­i­tive, crit­i­cal­ly im­por­tant da­ta un­der­scor­ing Keytru­da’s abil­i­ty to fight a broad seg­ment of the cas­es in the first-line lung can­cer field as a monother­a­py, with the Keytru­da/chemo com­bo the best op­tion (so far) in front­line squa­mous cas­es, where Roche tried — and large­ly failed — to el­bow ahead this week­end.

“If you think of the whole front­line lung can­cer field (ex­cept for EGFR and ALK mu­ta­tion cas­es),” says Mer­ck head of glob­al clin­i­cal de­vel­op­ment Roy Baynes, “for pret­ty much every­body there is a Keytru­da-based ther­a­py that makes sense for those pa­tients. It would be fair to say, all things be­ing equal, the chemo com­bi­na­tion is a very rea­son­able first-line op­tion.”

But not every­one is go­ing to be able to take the chemo com­bo, in­clud­ing pa­tients with high co-mor­bidi­ties. 

“Giv­en the sit­u­a­tion of all things be­ing equal, the chemo com­bo would be a pre­ferred ther­a­py,” says Baynes. “And if there are cir­cum­stances where chemo is not a pre­ferred ther­a­py, monother­a­py is a rea­son­able op­tion.”

In its monother­a­py study dubbed Keynote-042, pa­tients in the Keytru­da arm hit a me­di­an over­all sur­vival rate of 20 months, a clear­ly promis­ing out­come com­pared to 12.2 months for chemo-so­lo pa­tients with a PD-L1 tu­mor pro­por­tion score (TPS) of ≥50 per­cent. In pa­tients with a TPS of less than 20%, the OS rate was re­duced to 17.7 vs 13 months, and 16.7 vs 12.1 months for the over­all study pop­u­la­tion of pa­tients with a TPS of ≥1%.

The ‘042 study was the longer take of an ear­li­er, faster tri­al num­bered ‘024. And Mer­ck views it as a more thor­ough con­fir­ma­tion of what it saw in that quick take.  

Then there’s Keynote-407, a com­bi­na­tion of Keytru­da and chemo for front­line squa­mous NSCLC  which had es­sen­tial­ly the same de­sign as Roche’s IM­pow­er131, with Tecen­triq. Mer­ck’s team post­ed an im­pres­sive 36% re­duc­tion in the risk of death, a haz­ard ra­tio that won’t es­cape the at­ten­tion of spe­cial­ists. The Keytru­da com­bi­na­tion hit a me­di­an OS of 15.9 months com­pared to 11.3 months in the chemother­a­py-alone group. The me­di­an PFS was 6.4 months for the Keytru­da com­bi­na­tion com­pared with 4.8 months for chemother­a­py alone. 

And at the sec­ond in­ter­im read­out, the ORR was 57.9% for the com­bo com­pared to 38.4% for the chemother­a­py group. 

Roche has yet to see an OS ad­van­tage, but the PFS was close at 6.3 months for the Roche check­point vs 5.6 months for the con­trol — just a 3 week ad­van­tage. As al­ways when you com­pare da­ta on drugs that were not in a head-to-head tri­al, it’s prob­lem­at­ic to as­sess ri­val ther­a­pies. But with­out com­pet­i­tive OS re­sults, Roche is left with a small ad­van­tage in PFS that won’t com­pare well for an­a­lysts cov­er­ing the area.

The new da­ta sets will al­so in­evitably draw com­par­isons with Bris­tol-My­ers Squibb’s work with Op­di­vo. Bris­tol-My­ers has faced some stiff crit­i­cism for its set­backs as well as its tri­al de­signed in lung can­cer, where they’ve been a con­sis­tent run­ner up to Mer­ck.

The re­sults build on the re­cent­ly re­leased da­ta from Keynote-189 for non­squa­mous non-small cell lung can­cer, where re­searchers say that their com­bo of Keytru­da and chemo clear­ly beat out chemo alone on over­all sur­vival, though the fi­nal OS rate for the com­bi­na­tion has not yet been reached.

For Mer­ck, it’s an­oth­er chance to cel­e­brate pos­i­tive out­comes as ri­vals strug­gle to make their case for their drugs.

“As we look at the lung can­cer are­na,” Baynes adds, “we com­plet­ed 5 ran­dom­ized, con­trolled tri­als, with sur­vival ben­e­fits in all 5. It’s quite re­mark­able.”

Not every­one is pro­vid­ing Mer­ck with a stand­ing ova­tion, though. Some prac­ti­tion­ers in the field feel that those groups with a low­er TPS score on PD-L1 are def­i­nite­ly not get­ting a tremen­dous amount of help from Keytru­da. Here’s a note from lung can­cer ex­pert Jack West — a tho­racic on­col­o­gist at the Swedish Can­cer In­sti­tute at Swedish Med­ical Cen­ter — about my sto­ry:

Though I com­plete­ly agree that re­sults over­all are im­pres­sive and that Mer­ck is more or less run­ning the ta­ble with pem­bro in ad­vanced NSCLC, I need to high­light that the re­sults are not as fa­vor­able as your lan­guage would syggest for the pa­tients with low PD-L1 on KEYNOTE-042. The num­bers you use for pa­tients with low­er tu­mor PD-L1 ex­pres­sion in­clude the pa­tients with high PD-L1, who prop up the re­sults for the en­tire tri­al. When the re­sults of the 042 tri­al are looked at for pa­tients with PD-L1 1-49%, there is no ef­fi­ca­cy ad­van­tage for pem­bro. This doesn’t mean that on­col­o­gists and pa­tients won’t fa­vor it for com­pa­ra­ble ef­fi­ca­cy and more fa­vor­able tol­er­a­bil­i­ty than chemo, but it’s im­por­tant to clar­i­fy that the num­bers you’re pre­sent­ing for the “PD-L1 less than 20%” are ac­tu­al­ly not the num­bers for that sub­set alone but the num­bers for that sub­set com­bined with the larg­er num­ber of pa­tients with high­er tu­mor PD-L1 ex­pres­sion. The re­sults are pooled and mere­ly don’t “de-se­lect” the low PD-L1 group when they present “PD-L1 <50%” or “PD-L1 < 20%”, but they al­ways in­clude the pa­tients with high­er PD-L1 who are prop­ping up the tri­al over­all. And this is the sub­group for whomp pem­bro alone has been the stan­dard of care for more than 18 months, for whom we’d al­ready con­sid­er chemo alone an es­tab­lished in­fe­ri­or ap­proach in the US and wouldn’t en­roll on KN-042 these days.

Mer­ck has been pour­ing bil­lions of dol­lars in­to its Keytru­da pipeline, and the in­vest­ment has paid off hand­some­ly with a block­buster fran­chise and a col­lec­tion of more than 750 tri­als — an ex­plo­sion of clin­i­cal re­search. Five years ago, says Baynes, Mer­ck was at AS­CO with one pre­sen­ta­tion. For AS­CO 2018, it’s pre­sent­ing 140.

Brent Saunders [Getty Photos]

UP­DAT­ED: Ab­b­Vie seals $63B deal to buy a trou­bled Al­ler­gan — spelling out $1B in R&D cuts

Brent Saunders has found his way out of the current fix he’s in at Allergan $AGN. He’s selling the company to AbbVie for $63 billion in the latest example of the hot M&A market in biopharma.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 53,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Sanofi/Re­gen­eron mus­cle ahead of a ri­val No­var­tis/Roche team, win first ap­proval in key rhi­nos­i­nusi­tis field

Re­gen­eron and their part­ners at Sanofi have beat the No­var­tis/Roche team to the punch on an­oth­er key in­di­ca­tion for their block­buster an­ti-in­flam­ma­to­ry drug Dupix­ent. The drug team scored an ac­cel­er­at­ed FDA ap­proval for chron­ic rhi­nos­i­nusi­tis with nasal polyps, mak­ing this the first such NDA for the field.

An­a­lysts have been watch­ing this race for awhile now, as Sanofi/Re­gen­eron won a snap pri­or­i­ty re­view for what is now their third dis­ease in­di­ca­tion for this treat­ment. And they’re not near­ly done, build­ing up hopes for a ma­jor fran­chise.

Two biotech uni­corns swell pro­posed IPOs, eye­ing a $600M-plus wind­fall

We’ve been wait­ing for the ar­rival of Bridge­Bio’s IPO to top off the wave of new biotech of­fer­ings sweep­ing through Nas­daq at the end of H1. And now we learn that it’s been sub­stan­tial­ly up­sized.

Ini­tial­ly pen­ciled in at a uni­corn-sized $225 mil­lion, the KKR-backed biotech has spiked that to the neigh­bor­hood of $300 mil­lion, look­ing to sell 20 mil­lion shares at $14 to $16 each. That’s an added 5 mil­lion shares, re­ports Re­nais­sance Cap­i­tal, which fig­ures the pro­posed mar­ket val­u­a­tion for Neil Ku­mar’s com­pa­ny at $1.8 bil­lion.

No­var­tis holds back the copy­cat brigade's at­tack on its top drug fran­chise — for now

A fed­er­al judge has put a gener­ic chal­lenge to No­var­tis’ block­buster mul­ti­ple scle­ro­sis drug Gilenya on hold while a patent fight plays out in court.

Judge Leonard P. Stark is­sued a tem­po­rary in­junc­tion ear­li­er this week, forc­ing My­lan, Dr. Red­dy’s Lab­o­ra­to­ries and Au­robindo Phar­ma to shelve their launch plans to al­low the patent fight to pro­ceed. He ruled that al­low­ing the gener­ics in­to the mar­ket now would per­ma­nent­ly slash the price for No­var­tis, even if it pre­vails. 

Af­ter rais­ing $158M, this up­start's founders have star back­ers and plans to break new ground in gene ther­a­py

Back in 2014, Stephanie Tagliatela opted to take an early exit out of her PhD program after working in Mark Bear’s lab at MIT, where she specialized in the synaptic connections between neuronal cells in the brain. She never finished that PhD, but she and fellow MIT student Kartik Ramamoorthi — who was on the founding team at Voyager — came away with some ideas for a gene therapy startup.

Today, fully 5 years later, she and Ramamoorthi are taking the wraps off of a $104 million mega-round designed to take the cumulative work of their preclinical formative stage for Encoded Therapeutics into human studies. They’ve now raised $158 million since starting out in Illumina’s incubator in the Bay Area, and they believe they are firmly on track to do something unique in gene therapy.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 53,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Novotech CEO Dr. John Moller

Novotech CRO Award­ed Frost & Sul­li­van Best Biotech CRO Asia-Pa­cif­ic 2019

Known in the in­dus­try as the Asia-Pa­cif­ic CRO, Novotech is now lead CRO ser­vices provider for the grow­ing num­ber of in­ter­na­tion­al biotechs se­lect­ing the re­gion for their stud­ies.

Re­flect­ing this Asia-Pa­cif­ic growth, Novotech staff num­bers are up 20% since De­cem­ber 2018 to 600 in-house clin­i­cal re­search peo­ple across a full range of ser­vices, across the re­gion.

Novotech’s ca­pa­bil­i­ties have been rec­og­nized by an­a­lysts like Frost & Sul­li­van, most re­cent­ly with the pres­ti­gious Asia-Pa­cif­ic CRO Biotech of the year award for best prac­tices in clin­i­cal re­search for biotechs for the fifth year. See oth­er awards here.

Top an­a­lyst finds a sil­ver lin­ing in Ab­b­Vie’s $63B Al­ler­gan buy­out — but there’s a catch

Af­ter get­ting beat up on all sides from mar­ket ob­servers who don’t much care for the lat­est mega-deal to ar­rive in bio­phar­ma, at least one promi­nent an­a­lyst now is start­ing to like what he sees in the num­bers for Ab­b­Vie/Al­ler­gan.

But it’s go­ing to take some en­cour­age­ment if Ab­b­Vie ex­ecs want it to last.

Ab­b­Vie’s mar­ket cap de­clined $20 bil­lion on Tues­day as the stock took a 17% hit dur­ing the day. And SVB Leerink’s Ge­of­frey Porges can see a dis­tinct out­line of an up­side af­ter re­view­ing the fun­da­men­tals of the deal.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 53,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

While Ako­rn works to re­vive its for­tunes, the FDA hits it with an­oth­er warn­ing let­ter

Ako­rn just can’t dig it­self out of its hole.

The spe­cial­ty gener­ic drug­mak­er has re­ceived yet an­oth­er warn­ing let­ter from the FDA this year. With­out dis­clos­ing any specifics, the Lake For­est, Illi­nois-based drug­mak­er on Wednes­day said the US reg­u­la­tor had is­sued the let­ter, cit­ing an in­spec­tion of its Som­er­set, New Jer­sey man­u­fac­tur­ing fa­cil­i­ty in Ju­ly and Au­gust of 2018. The com­pa­ny’s shares $AKRX dipped about 1.7% to $4.65 be­fore the bell.

FDA re­jects Ac­er's rare dis­ease drug, asks for new tri­al — shares crater

Ac­er Ther­a­peu­tics’ bid to re­pur­pose celipro­lol — a be­ta-block­er on the mar­ket for hy­per­ten­sion — as a treat­ment for a rare, in­her­it­ed con­nec­tive tis­sue dis­or­der has hit a se­vere set­back. The New­ton, Mass­a­chu­setts-based com­pa­ny on Tues­day said the FDA re­ject­ed the drug and has asked for an­oth­er clin­i­cal tri­al.

The com­pa­ny’s shares $AC­ER cratered near­ly 77% to $4.47 in Tues­day morn­ing trad­ing.