Neb­u­liz­er fails PhII COPD study, but Verona plans to march on

Billed as the first new class of bron­chodila­tor in more than four decades, Verona Phar­ma’s $VR­NA ex­per­i­men­tal neb­u­liz­er did not con­fer sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant im­prove­ment on a mea­sure of lung func­tion in Phase II study in­volv­ing pa­tients with chron­ic ob­struc­tive pul­monary dis­ease (COPD) who were al­ready on in­haled long-act­ing bron­chodila­tors.

Verona has tout­ed the drug, known as en­sifen­trine or RPL554, as the first po­ten­tial ther­a­py for res­pi­ra­to­ry dis­eases that acts as both a bron­chodila­tor and an­ti-in­flam­ma­to­ry agent in a soli­tary com­pound. Two dos­es of the drug in a neb­u­lized for­mu­la­tion were be­ing test­ed in the three-day, place­bo-con­trolled tri­al as a main­te­nance treat­ment for 79 COPD pa­tients, who were al­ready on com­mon­ly used LAMA/LA­BA treat­ments.

Pa­tients re­ceived three days of treat­ment with each of two dose strengths (1.5 mg or 6 mg) of neb­u­lized en­sifen­trine or place­bo twice dai­ly. The pri­ma­ry end­point was im­prove­ment in lung func­tion with en­sifen­trine, as mea­sured by FEV1 (forced ex­pi­ra­to­ry vol­ume in one sec­ond), a stan­dard mea­sure of res­pi­ra­to­ry func­tion, four hours post-dose af­ter the morn­ing dose on day three.

Jan-An­ders Karls­son

The pri­ma­ry end­point of FEV1 was not found to be sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant af­ter the morn­ing dose, al­though the small­er en­sifen­trine dose im­proved peak FEV1, the com­pa­ny said, adding that the im­prove­ment was main­tained through­out the 24-hour pe­ri­od on day 3. The com­pa­ny’s shares slumped about 36% in mid­day trad­ing.

How­ev­er, da­ta on sec­ondary end­points in­clud­ing peak FEV1 over time and re­duc­tions in resid­ual vol­ume were en­cour­ag­ing: Peak FEV1 af­ter evening dose on day 3 showed sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant im­prove­ment with both dos­es, and sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant re­duc­tions in mean resid­ual vol­ume were ob­served 15 min­utes fol­low­ing the evening dose on day 3, the Lon­don-based com­pa­ny said.

Over­all, the high­er dose did not re­sult in greater im­prove­ment in lung func­tion as com­pared with the 1.5 mg dose.

But Verona struck an up­beat tone. “Hav­ing demon­strat­ed in pre­vi­ous stud­ies the po­ten­tial of en­sifen­trine to de­liv­er ben­e­fits to pa­tients on no or sin­gle bron­chodila­tor ther­a­py, we be­lieve that this short study con­tin­ues to sup­port our view that en­sifen­trine may al­so be of ben­e­fit to more se­vere COPD pa­tients on dual and triple ther­a­py, for whom there are few oth­er treat­ment op­tions,” said Verona chief Jan-An­ders Karls­son in a state­ment.

“While we are dis­ap­point­ed that this ex­plorato­ry Phase 2 study did not achieve sta­tis­ti­cal sig­nif­i­cance for its pri­ma­ry end­point, these da­ta give us clar­i­ty on the de­sign…for fu­ture long-term stud­ies.”

Sun­Trust Robin­son Humphrey’s Ed­ward Nash ap­peared to agree with the com­pa­ny’s as­sess­ment, say­ing that the tri­al’s main goal was not met due to an un­ex­pect­ed­ly high­er place­bo ef­fect – oth­er­wise the drug did show im­proved FEV1 on top of dual/triple ther­a­py in a very chal­leng­ing COPD pa­tient pop­u­la­tion.

“We be­lieve the FDA would wel­come the low­er dose from a safe­ty stand­point and be­lieve to­tal­i­ty of da­ta which in­cludes ~104mL and 127mL im­prove­ment on top of monother­a­py (tiotropi­um) back­ground and 40mL to 50mL FEV1 im­prove­ments seen in dual/triple back­ground ther­a­py re­port­ed to­day pro­vides a pos­i­tive clin­i­cal and com­mer­cial pro­file for en­sifen­trine.”

Of the pa­tients treat­ed with dual bron­chodila­tor (LAMA/LA­BA) and triple ther­a­py (LAMA/LA­BA/ICS), re­search sug­gests that up to 40% (ap­prox­i­mate­ly 800,000 pa­tients in the US alone) are un­con­trolled, re­main­ing symp­to­matic and at an in­creased risk of ex­ac­er­ba­tions, ac­cord­ing to Verona.

Da­ta have sug­gest­ed that en­sifen­trine is an ef­fec­tive ad­di­tion to sin­gle bron­chodila­tors. The com­pa­ny is cur­rent­ly con­duct­ing a Phase II tri­al to eval­u­ate a dry pow­der in­haler for­mu­la­tion of en­sifen­trine for the same pa­tient pop­u­la­tion, and plans to test en­sifen­trine in a me­tered-dose in­haler for­mu­la­tion in pa­tients with COPD. In ad­di­tion, the drug is al­so be­ing test­ed for use in cys­tic fi­bro­sis and asth­ma.

Regeneron CEO Leonard Schleifer speaks at a meeting with President Donald Trump, members of the Coronavirus Task Force, and pharmaceutical executives in the Cabinet Room of the White House (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

OWS shifts spot­light to drugs to fight Covid-19, hand­ing Re­gen­eron $450M to be­gin large scale man­u­fac­tur­ing in the US

The US government is on a spending spree. And after committing billions to vaccines defense operations are now doling out more of the big bucks through Operation Warp Speed to back a rapid flip of a drug into the market to stop Covid-19 from ravaging patients — possibly inside of 2 months.

The beneficiary this morning is Regeneron, the big biotech engaged in a frenzied race to develop an antibody cocktail called REGN-COV2 that just started a late-stage program to prove its worth in fighting the virus. BARDA and the Department of Defense are awarding Regeneron a $450 million contract to cover bulk delivery of the cocktail starting as early as late summer, with money added for fill/finish and storage activities.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 84,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: Bio­gen shares spike as ex­ecs com­plete a de­layed pitch for their con­tro­ver­sial Alzheimer's drug — the next move be­longs to the FDA

Biogen is stepping out onto the high wire today, reporting that the team working on the controversial Alzheimer’s drug aducanumab has now completed their submission to the FDA. And they want the agency to bless it with a priority review that would cut the agency’s decision-making time to a mere 6 months.

The news drove a 10% spike in Biogen’s stock $BIIB ahead of the bell.

Part of that spike can be attributed to a relief rally. Biogen execs rattled backers and a host of analysts earlier in the year when they unexpectedly delayed their filing to the third quarter. That delay provoked all manner of speculation after CEO Michel Vounatsos and R&D chief Al Sandrock failed to persuade influential observers that the pandemic and other factors had slowed the timeline for filing. Actually making the pitch at least satisfies skeptics that the FDA was not likely pushing back as Biogen was pushing in. From the start, Biogen execs claimed that they were doing everything in cooperation with the FDA, saying that regulators had signaled their interest in reviewing the submission.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 84,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Daniel O'Day, Gilead CEO (Kevin Dietsch/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

A new study points to $6.5B in pub­lic sup­port build­ing the sci­en­tif­ic foun­da­tion of Gilead­'s remde­sivir. Should that be re­flect­ed in the price?

By drug R&D standards, Gilead’s move to repurpose remdesivir for Covid-19 and grab an emergency use authorization was a remarkably easy, low-cost layup that required modest efficacy and a clean safety profile from just a small group of patients.

The drug OK also arrived after Gilead had paid much of the freight on getting it positioned to move fast.

In a study by Fred Ledley, director of the Center for Integration of Science and Industry at Bentley University in Waltham, MA, researchers concluded that the NIH had invested only $46.5 million in the research devoted to the drug ahead of the pandemic, a small sum compared to the more than $1 billion Gilead expected to spend getting it out this year, all on top of what it had already cost in R&D expenses.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

FDA bars the door — for now — against Mer­ck’s star can­cer drug af­ter Roche beat them to the punch

Merck has been handed a rare setback at the FDA.

After filing for the accelerated approval of a combination of their star PD-1 drug Keytruda with Eisai’s Lenvima as a first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, the FDA nixed the move, handing out a CRL because Roche beat them to the punch on the same indication by a matter of weeks.

According to Merck:

Ahead of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act action dates of Merck’s and Eisai’s applications, another combination therapy was approved based on a randomized, controlled trial that demonstrated overall survival. Consequently, the CRL stated that Merck’s and Eisai’s applications do not provide evidence that Keytruda in combination with Lenvima represents a meaningful advantage over available therapies for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic HCC with no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease. Since the applications for KEYNOTE-524/Study 116 no longer meet the criteria for accelerated approval, both companies plan to work with the FDA to take appropriate next steps, which include conducting a well-controlled clinical trial that demonstrates substantial evidence of effectiveness and the clinical benefit of the combination.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 84,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Covid-19 roundup: Mod­er­na sticks to Ju­ly for its Phase III as ru­mors swirl; Fol­low­ing US lead, EU buys up Covid-19 treat­ments

The Phase III might be delayed from its original early July goal, but Moderna says it will still kick off the pivotal study for what could ultimately be the first Covid-19 vaccine before the end of the month.

A day after Reuters reported that squabbling between the Cambridge biotech and government regulators had held up the trial by about two weeks, Moderna released a statement saying that they had completed enrollment of their 650-person Phase II trial and were on track to begin Phase III by the end of the month. The protocol for that study, which is meant to prove whether or not the vaccine can prevent people from becoming sick, has been finalized, they said.

GSK sets the stage for a toe-to-toe mar­ket show­down with Gilead­'s HIV cham­pi­on Tru­va­da

ViiV Healthcare and majority owner GlaxoSmithKline have cleared another important hurdle on a long-running quest to challenge Gilead’s dominance in preventative HIV treatments.

The final analysis of a new study shows the GSK subsidiary’s long-lasting injection, cabotegravir, proved 66% more effective in HIV prevention than Gilead’s breakthrough Truvada pill. And they now intend to carve away some of the blockbuster revenue that Gilead has enjoyed for years.

Donald and Melania Trump watch the smoke of fireworks from the South Lawn of the White House on July 4, 2020 (via Getty)

Which drug de­vel­op­ers of­fer Trump a quick, game-chang­ing ‘so­lu­tion’ as the pan­dem­ic roars back? Eli Lil­ly and Ab­Cellera look to break out of the pack

We are unleashing our nation’s scientific brilliance and will likely have a therapeutic and/or vaccine solution long before the end of the year.

— Donald Trump, July 4

Next week administration officials plan to promote a new study they say shows promising results on therapeutics, the officials said. They wouldn’t describe the study in any further detail because, they said, its disclosure would be “market-moving.”

— NBC News, July 3

Something’s cooking. And it’s not just July 4 leftovers involving stale buns and uneaten hot dogs.

Over the long weekend observers picked up signs that the focus in the Trump administration may swiftly shift from the bright spotlight on vaccines being promised this fall, around the time of the election, to include drugs that could possibly keep patients out of the hospital and take the political sting out of the soaring Covid-19 numbers causing embarrassment in states that swiftly reopened — as Trump cheered along.

So far, Gilead has been the chief beneficiary of the drive on drugs, swiftly offering enough early data to get remdesivir an emergency authorization and into the hands of the US government. But their drug, while helpful in cutting stays, is known for a limited, modest effect. And that won’t tamp down on the hurricane of criticism that’s been tearing at the White House, and buffeting the president’s most stalwart core defenders as the economy suffers.

We’ve had positive early-stage vaccine data, most recently from Pfizer and BioNTech, playing catchup on an mRNA race led by Moderna — where every little sign of potential trouble is magnified into a lethal threat, just as every advance excites a frenzy of support. But that race still has months to play out, with more Phase I data due ahead of the mid-stage numbers looming ahead. A vaccine may not be available in large enough quantities until well into 2021, which is still wildly ambitious.

So what about a drug solution?

Trump’s initial support for a panacea focused on hydroxychloroquine. But that fizzled in the face of data underscoring its ineffectiveness — killing trials that aren’t likely to be restarted because of a recent population-based study offering some support. And there are a number of existing drugs being repurposed to see how they help hospitalized patients.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Stephen Hahn, AP

Trump and Navar­ro press again for hy­drox­y­chloro­quine. Can the FDA stay in­de­pen­dent?

Tuesday morning, economist and Trump advisor Peter Navarro walked onto the White House driveway and promptly brought a political cloud back onto the FDA.

Speaking to a White House pool reporter, Navarro said that four Detroit doctors were, based on a single disputed study, filing for the FDA to again issue an emergency authorization for hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malarial pill that President Trump hyped for months as a Covid-19 treatment over the objections of his own scientists. Then, while avoiding directly calling for the FDA to OK the drug, blasted the agency. He said its decision to pull an earlier authorization “was based on bad science” and “had a tremendously negative effect” on doctors and patients.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 84,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

David Hallal

AlloVir tests how much an an­tivi­ral biotech can reap in a pan­dem­ic stock mar­ket

The pandemic stock market has proven fruitful for virtually any type of biotech. Now a 7-year-old cell therapy startup will see how much it can yield for a company that specializes in fighting viruses.

AlloVir, a company that until 2019 largely lived off grant money, has filed for a $100 million IPO to back its line of off-the-shelf, virus-fighting T cells. Although in normal circumstances, $100 million could be a solid return for a biotech that got its first major round of funding only last year, we’ll have to wait to see how much the company ultimately earns. As Covid-19 has sent investor money scurrying to almost anyone in drug development, every single biotech to go public this year has prized above their midpoint or upsized their offering, according to Renaissance Capital, sometimes dramatically so.