UP­DAT­ED: Pan­el of neu­ro­science ex­perts lays out the com­pli­ca­tions with us­ing Bio­gen's new Alzheimer's drug

Treat­ment of ear­ly Alzheimer’s pa­tients with Bio­gen’s new drug Aduhelm should close­ly re­sem­ble how the drug was stud­ied in its piv­otal clin­i­cal tri­als, ac­cord­ing to new rec­om­men­da­tions from a pan­el of neu­ro­science ex­perts led by UN­LV’s Jef­frey Cum­mings.

Jef­frey Cum­mings

“Those con­sid­er­ing ad­u­canum­ab ther­a­py should un­der­stand that the ex­pect­ed ben­e­fit is slow­ing of cog­ni­tive and func­tion­al de­cline; im­prove­ment of the cur­rent clin­i­cal state is not an­tic­i­pat­ed,” they wrote Tues­day in The Jour­nal of Pre­ven­tion of Alzheimer’s Dis­ease, not­ing that some of their rec­om­men­da­tions are more spe­cif­ic or more re­stric­tive than the in­for­ma­tion pro­vid­ed in the FDA’s pre­scrib­ing in­for­ma­tion.

Cum­mings has re­ceived more than $45,000 in pay­ments from Bio­gen since 2014, ac­cord­ing to Open Pay­ments da­ta. Sec­ond au­thor Paul Aisen of the Alzheimer’s Treat­ment Re­search In­sti­tute at the Uni­ver­si­ty of South­ern Cal­i­for­nia, who’s al­so ed­i­tor in chief of the Jour­nal of Pre­ven­tion of Alzheimer’s Dis­ease, al­so re­ceived more than $38,000 in pay­ments from Bio­gen in 2014. Third au­thor Alireza Atri of the Ban­ner Sun Health Re­search In­sti­tute took more than $32,000 in pay­ments from Bio­gen since 2014.

An aca­d­e­m­ic in neu­ro­science who asked to re­main anony­mous told End­points News that these rec­om­men­da­tions are es­sen­tial­ly an ex­ten­sion of Bio­gen’s mar­ket­ing arm.

One of the biggest is­sues with ad­u­canum­ab is that it sub­stan­tial­ly in­creas­es the rate of amy­loid-re­lat­ed imag­ing ab­nor­mal­i­ties, al­so known as ARIA, com­pared to rates ob­served in nat­ur­al his­to­ry stud­ies or tri­al place­bo groups.

And while ARIA on­ly led to about 6% of pa­tients on ad­u­canum­ab stop­ping their in­volve­ment short in the tri­als, com­pared to 0.6% of pa­tients on place­bo, ARIA (ARIA-E and ARIA-H) oc­curred in about 35% of pa­tients on the high dose of ad­u­canum­ab com­pared to about 3% of those in the place­bo group, the pan­elists note.

“If pa­tients with ARIA (ARIA-E or ARIA-H) have symp­toms, treat­ment should be sus­pend­ed, and a clin­i­cal as­sess­ment and neu­ro­log­i­cal ex­am­i­na­tion per­formed. MRI should be re­peat­ed in 1 month; if the ARIA-E has re­solved or the ARIA-H is sta­bi­lized, treat­ment can be re­sumed. If ARIA-E has not re­solved and ARIA-H is wors­en­ing, treat­ment is with­held, and month­ly MRIs ob­tained un­til treat­ment can be re-ini­ti­at­ed or a de­ci­sion is made to ter­mi­nate treat­ment … Ad­u­canum­ab should not be re-ini­ti­at­ed in pa­tients with se­vere symp­to­matic ARIA (e.g., seizure, stroke-like syn­dromes),” they wrote.

But ARIA-E was most com­mon­ly ob­served in par­tic­i­pants who were APOE-4 gene car­ri­ers (43%) and least of­ten in those with­out the APOE-4 gene (20.3%).

While the FDA-ap­proved pre­scrib­ing in­for­ma­tion for us­ing ad­u­canum­ab do not re­quire APOE geno­typ­ing, the ex­pert pan­el “rec­om­mends that pa­tients and care part­ners be en­gaged in a pa­tient-cen­tered dis­cus­sion of the risk that an APOE-4 geno­type con­fers for the risk of ARIA. This dis­cus­sion will de­ter­mine if geno­type in­for­ma­tion would in­flu­ence their de­ci­sion to be treat­ed with ad­u­canum­ab and if they wish to pur­sue APOE geno­typ­ing,” par­tic­u­lar­ly as ge­net­ic test­ing to de­ter­mine the APOE geno­type of the par­tic­i­pants was re­quired in the piv­otal tri­als.

Ad­u­canum­ab’s la­bel, tight­ened by the agency a month af­ter the ac­cel­er­at­ed ap­proval, notes on ARIA: “En­hanced clin­i­cal vig­i­lance for ARIA is rec­om­mend­ed dur­ing the first 8 dos­es of treat­ment with ADUHELM, par­tic­u­lar­ly dur­ing titra­tion. If a pa­tient ex­pe­ri­ences symp­toms which could be sug­ges­tive of ARIA, clin­i­cal eval­u­a­tion should be per­formed, in­clud­ing MRI test­ing if in­di­cat­ed.”

The pan­el added: “Dose in­ter­rup­tion or treat­ment dis­con­tin­u­a­tion is rec­om­mend­ed for symp­to­matic ARIA and for mod­er­ate-se­vere ARIA. The Ex­pert Pan­el rec­om­mends MRIs pri­or to ini­ti­at­ing ther­a­py, dur­ing the titra­tion of the drug, and at any time the pa­tient has symp­toms sug­ges­tive of ARIA.”

The pan­elists al­so not­ed that their guide­lines were writ­ten de­spite the cur­rent lack of peer-re­viewed pub­li­ca­tions about ad­u­canum­ab’s Phase III piv­otal stud­ies, which the com­pa­ny re­cent­ly said it ex­pect­ed to do. Changes in the guide­lines may be re­quired once all the da­ta is avail­able in the pub­lic do­main, they not­ed.

As far as what to do if a pa­tient miss­es one of his month­ly dos­es of ad­u­canum­ab, the pan­el notes that this co­nun­drum has not been stud­ied.

“The Ex­pert Pan­el rec­om­mends that if a pa­tient miss­es a dose, the next in­fu­sion should be ad­min­is­tered as soon as pos­si­ble at the dose ad­min­is­tered in the pre­vi­ous in­fu­sion. If a pa­tient miss­es three or more dos­es and re­quires con­tin­ued treat­ment, titra­tion should be re-ini­ti­at­ed be­gin­ning at a dose lev­el one step be­low that pre­vi­ous­ly ad­min­is­tered (e.g., if the pa­tient was at 6 mg/kg pre­vi­ous­ly, they would re­sume at a dose lev­el of 3 mg/kg) with the dose in­creased every oth­er month as de­scribed for treat­ment ini­ti­a­tion,” they wrote.

They al­so not­ed cer­tain pa­tients who were ex­clud­ed from Bio­gen’s clin­i­cal tri­als and might need fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion:

“Pa­tients with ev­i­dence of mi­cro­he­m­or­rhage on MRI or with clot­ting ab­nor­mal­i­ties or who were on an­ti­co­ag­u­lants were ex­clud­ed from the piv­otal tri­als. It is not known if these ex­clu­sions af­fect­ed the rate of mi­cro­he­m­or­rhage as­so­ci­at­ed with ad­u­canum­ab ther­a­py. The risk of se­vere ARIA in a per­son re­ceiv­ing an­ti­co­ag­u­lants or with a clot­ting dis­or­der is suf­fi­cient to ex­clude them from treat­ment with ad­u­canum­ab. Platelet an­ti-ag­gre­ga­tion agents are al­low­able as con­comi­tant ther­a­py. Lum­bar punc­ture for con­fir­ma­tion of amy­loid sta­tus should not be per­formed on pa­tients be­ing treat­ed with an­ti­co­ag­u­lants; the oc­cur­rence of perispinal he­m­or­rhage and spinal cord com­pres­sion are low but can oc­cur and the risk should be avoid­ed.”

As far as when to even start amy­loid imag­ing, or when such imag­ing is ap­pro­pri­ate, the neu­ro­sci­en­tists point to three con­di­tions: “a) there is a cog­ni­tive com­plaint and cog­ni­tive im­pair­ment has been ob­jec­tive­ly con­firmed im­pair­ment; b) AD is a pos­si­ble di­ag­no­sis, but the di­ag­no­sis is un­cer­tain af­ter a com­pre­hen­sive eval­u­a­tion by a de­men­tia ex­pert; and c) knowl­edge of the pres­ence or ab­sence of amy­loid-be­ta pathol­o­gy is ex­pect­ed to in­crease di­ag­nos­tic cer­tain­ty and al­ter man­age­ment.”

The pan­el rec­om­mends that pro­grams of­fer­ing ad­u­canum­ab and us­ing amy­loid PET to con­firm the di­ag­no­sis of AD should en­sure its em­ploy­ees are prop­er­ly trained in amy­loid PET in­ter­pre­ta­tion, as all pa­tients in­clud­ed in the piv­otal tri­als had pos­i­tive amy­loid PET.

The pan­el al­so says that pa­tients with neu­ro­log­i­cal dis­or­ders, such as Parkin­son’s dis­ease, ev­i­dence of stroke or rapid­ly pro­gres­sive de­men­tia, should not be treat­ed with ad­u­canum­ab.

“Ad­u­canum­ab has not been test­ed in pa­tients with mod­er­ate or se­vere AD and pro­gres­sion in­to the more ad­vanced phas­es of AD will prompt re­assess­ment of treat­ment con­tin­u­a­tion,” they note. “The Ex­pert Pan­el rec­om­mends that clin­i­cians care­ful­ly re­view the ev­i­dence of ben­e­fit and the po­ten­tial risk in pa­tients who progress to mod­er­ate de­men­tia af­ter ap­pro­pri­ate use of ad­u­canum­ab in ear­ly AD.”

Over­all, the pan­el ex­plains how ad­u­canum­ab re­quires “sub­stan­tial in­fra­struc­ture” to ap­pro­pri­ate­ly ad­min­is­ter the drug, as well as ex­pert clin­i­cians skilled in recog­ni­tion of ear­ly AD; amy­loid PET or lum­bar punc­ture ca­pa­bil­i­ty; ex­perts in amy­loid PET in­ter­pre­ta­tion or CSF analy­sis; in­fu­sion cen­ter avail­abil­i­ty; and ac­cess to MRI and ex­perts in recog­ni­tion and man­age­ment of ARIA.

In an ac­com­pa­ny­ing com­men­tary, Serge Gau­thi­er of the De­part­ment of Neu­rol­o­gy and Neu­ro­surgery at McGill Uni­ver­si­ty in Mon­tre­al, called for an­oth­er place­bo-con­trolled tri­al.

“Fu­ture rec­om­men­da­tions could ad­dress the need of con­fir­ma­to­ry da­ta on clin­i­cal ef­fi­ca­cy, tak­ing ad­van­tage of the FDA re­quire­ment for an­oth­er place­bo-con­trolled study: it is an op­por­tu­ni­ty to es­tab­lish if an­ti-amy­loid ther­a­py can be stopped once the amy­loid load has been rec­ti­fied, through a re­peat PET amy­loid scan af­ter 12 or 18 months, fol­lowed by ran­dom­iza­tion to con­tin­u­a­tion of ad­u­canum­ab, to place­bo, to an an­ti-tau drug or a com­bi­na­tion of the two drug class. This ran­dom­ized de­layed start fac­to­r­i­al de­sign may go a long way in in­flu­enc­ing fu­ture ther­a­py of AD,” he wrote.

Ed­i­tor’s note: Ar­ti­cle up­dat­ed with the ex­pert pan­el’s fi­nan­cial con­flicts with Bio­gen.

Health­care Dis­par­i­ties and Sick­le Cell Dis­ease

In the complicated U.S. healthcare system, navigating a serious illness such as cancer or heart disease can be remarkably challenging for patients and caregivers. When that illness is classified as a rare disease, those challenges can become even more acute. And when that rare disease occurs in a population that experiences health disparities, such as people with sickle cell disease (SCD) who are primarily Black and Latino, challenges can become almost insurmountable.

David Meek, new Mirati CEO (Marlene Awaad/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Fresh off Fer­Gene's melt­down, David Meek takes over at Mi­rati with lead KRAS drug rac­ing to an ap­proval

In the insular world of biotech, a spectacular failure can sometimes stay on any executive’s record for a long time. But for David Meek, the man at the helm of FerGene’s recent implosion, two questionable exits made way for what could be an excellent rebound.

Meek, most recently FerGene’s CEO and a past head at Ipsen, has become CEO at Mirati Therapeutics, taking the reins from founding CEO Charles Baum, who will step over into the role of president and head of R&D, according to a release.

Ex­elix­is pulls a sur­prise win in thy­roid can­cer just days ahead of fi­nal Cabome­tyx read­out

Exelixis added a thyroid cancer indication to its super-seller Cabometyx’s label on Friday — months before the FDA was expected to make a decision, and days before the company was set to unveil the final data at #ESMO21.

At a median follow-up of 10.1 months, differentiated thyroid cancer patients treated with Cabometyx (cabozantinib) lived a median of 11 months without their disease worsening, compared to just 1.9 months for patients given a placebo, Exelixis said on Monday.

Volker Wagner (L) and Jeff Legos

As Bay­er, No­var­tis stack up their ra­dio­phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal da­ta at #ES­MO21, a key de­bate takes shape

Ten years ago, a small Norwegian biotech by the name of Algeta showed up at ESMO — then the European Multidisciplinary Cancer Conference 2011 — and declared that its Bayer-partnered targeted radionuclide therapy, radium-223 chloride, boosted the overall survival of castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with symptomatic bone metastases.

In a Phase III study dubbed ALSYMPCA, patients who were treated with radium-223 chloride lived a median of 14 months compared to 11.2 months. The FDA would stamp an approval on it based on those data two years later, after Bayer snapped up Algeta and christened the drug Xofigo.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Dave Lennon, former president of Novartis Gene Therapies

Zol­gens­ma patent spat brews be­tween No­var­tis and Re­genxbio as top No­var­tis gene ther­a­py ex­ec de­parts

Regenxbio, a small licensor of gene therapy viral vectors spun out from the University of Pennsylvania, is now finding itself in the middle of some major league patent fights.

In addition to a patent suit with Sarepta Therapeutics from last September, Novartis, is now trying to push its smaller partner out of the way. The Swiss biopharma licensed Regenxbio’s AAV9 vector for its $2.1 million spinal muscular atrophy therapy Zolgensma.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Mi­rati tri­umphs again in KRAS-mu­tat­ed lung can­cer with a close­ly watched FDA fil­ing now in the cards

After a busy weekend at #ESMO21, which included a big readout for its KRAS drug adagrasib in colon cancer, Mirati Therapeutics is ready to keep the pressure on competitor Amgen with lung cancer data that will undergird an upcoming filing.

In topline results from a Phase II cohort of its KRYSTAL-1 study, adagrasib posted a response rate of 43% in second-line-or-later patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer containing a KRAS-G12C mutation, Mirati said Monday.

Ex-My­lan em­ploy­ee pleads guilty to in­sid­er trad­ing, il­le­gal­ly deal­ing on FDA ap­provals, earn­ings and Up­john merg­er

A former Mylan IT executive pleaded guilty Friday to an insider trading scheme where he bought and sold stock options on another executive’s advice.

Prosecutors secured the plea from Dayakar Mallu, Mylan’s former VP of global operations information technology, after uncovering the plan. Mallu collaborated with an unnamed “senior manager,” the SEC said, to trade options ahead of Mylan public announcements regarding FDA approvals, revenue reports and its merger with the Pfizer generics subsidiary Upjohn. The two subsequently shared profits.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

As­traZeneca, Dai­ichi Sanky­o's ADC En­her­tu blows away Roche's Kad­cy­la in sec­ond-line ad­vanced breast can­cer

AstraZeneca and Japanese drugmaker Daiichi Sankyo think they’ve struck gold with their next-gen ADC drug Enhertu, which has shown some striking data in late-stage breast cancer trials and early solid tumor tests. Getting into earlier patients is now the goal, starting with Enhertu’s complete walkover of a Roche drug in second-line breast cancer revealed Saturday.

Enhertu cut the risk of disease progression or death by a whopping 72% (p=<0.0001) compared with Roche’s ADC Kadcyla in second-line unresectable and/or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer patients who had previously undergone treatment with a Herceptin-chemo combo, according to interim data from the Phase III DESTINY-Breast03 head-to-head study presented at this weekend’s #ESMO21.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Rafaèle Tordjman (Jeito Capital)

Con­ti­nu­ity and di­ver­si­ty: Rafaèle Tord­j­man's women-led VC firm tops out first fund at $630M

For a first-time fund, Jeito Capital talks a lot about continuity.

Rafaèle Tordjman had spotlighted that concept ever since she started building the firm in 2018, promising to go the extra mile(s) with biotech entrepreneurs while pushing them to reach patients faster.

Coincidentally, the lack of continuity was one of the sore spots listed in a report about the European healthcare sector published that same year by the European Investment Bank — whose fund is one of the LPs, alongside the American pension fund Teacher Retirement System of Texas and Singapore’s Temasek, to help Jeito close its first fund at $630 million (€534 million). As previously reported, Sanofi had chimed in €50 million, marking its first investment in a French life sciences fund.