Plot­ting to go toe-to-toe with heavy­weight Pfiz­er, lit­tle Ei­dos plans quick score in PhI­II AT­TR-CM study

Neil Ku­mar at an End­points event. (Jeff Ru­mans for End­points News)

So how does a small cap biotech go toe-to-toe with the likes of Pfiz­er, when the phar­ma gi­ant is lin­ing up for one of the most care­ful­ly watched FDA de­ci­sions in bio­phar­ma?

Ei­dos Ther­a­peu­tics $EI­DX thinks it has the an­swer as they play David to Pfiz­er’s Go­liath.

The biotech to­day out­lined its piv­otal strat­e­gy for AG10, an oral small mol­e­cule de­signed to treat transthyretin amy­loid car­diomy­opa­thy, AT­TR-CM. Work­ing with the FDA, the biotech came up with a Phase III tri­al de­sign that the ex­ecs in charge say gives them two po­ten­tial piv­otal dead­lines. The first ar­rives af­ter 12 months of treat­ment, as pa­tients are giv­en a 6-minute walk test. The next comes af­ter 30 months, as re­searchers eval­u­ate pa­tient da­ta on all-cause mor­tal­i­ty and fre­quen­cy of car­dio­vas­cu­lar-re­lat­ed hos­pi­tal­iza­tions.

That tri­al starts to­day. And Pfiz­er gets its FDA de­ci­sion — a like­ly yes — in Ju­ly. That puts them right up against Al­ny­lam, which got a pi­o­neer­ing OK for its RNAi ther­a­py last year.

Tri­al launch­es by and large don’t get a lot of cov­er­age. In this heat­ed de­vel­op­ment era we’re in, it’s hard to gain much at­ten­tion for your piv­otal time­line — es­pe­cial­ly if you’re play­ing catch-up. But Ei­dos hopes to pre­pare a case­book ex­am­ple of how to carve out a time­line that can give you a shot at com­pet­ing rel­a­tive­ly quick­ly with the heavy­weights of the world. And it’s worth a look as we be­gin to track their late-stage progress.

“If you are com­ing from be­hind with a bet­ter drug, you should get it to the mar­ket­place,” says Neil Ku­mar, who runs Bridge­Bio, the um­brel­la or­ga­ni­za­tion that con­trols Ei­dos and a slate of oth­er star­tups.

“It’s a pret­ty cool path,” says Ku­mar, “a 12-month place­bo-con­trolled tri­al, which is a great op­tion for pa­tients with no ac­cess to any small mol­e­cule sta­bi­liz­er.”

Ku­mar doesn’t want to talk price right now — no one does in this busi­ness ahead of an FDA ap­proval. But you can pret­ty much bet that if it can get out ear­ly with 12-month da­ta, pric­ing will be key if it wants to carve away at the fran­chise Pfiz­er will have al­ready built.

The phar­ma gi­ant has been un­der the gun on pric­ing, and just about every­one ex­pects they’ll come up with an ag­gres­sive 6-fig­ure price tag on their drug, once it’s ap­proved — par­tic­u­lar­ly if they can’t keep rais­ing the price af­ter it hits the mar­ket.

In ad­di­tion, a lot of these pa­tients will be on Medicare, and could be fac­ing a big out-of-pock­et ex­pense as long as the donut hole re­mains. If Ei­dos comes up with a much bet­ter price, they stand a bet­ter chance at win­ning over mar­ket share. And they can move in af­ter Pfiz­er helps iden­ti­fy the pa­tient pop­u­la­tion — which Ku­mar says is in the hun­dreds of thou­sands — through im­proved di­ag­no­sis.

“It’s al­most like Alzheimer’s of the heart, one of the biggest ge­net­ic mar­kets out there,” he adds.

Ei­dos shares got a 10% boost on the plan, but the biotech is play­ing a tough game, against tough odds. 

Pfiz­er’s mar­ket­ing ma­chine is one of the biggest and best in the busi­ness. Any new launch like this will be giv­en a top pri­or­i­ty. And they’ll have an ear­ly mover ad­van­tage, which in this mar­ket­place comes with a ton of built-in ad­van­tages.

Ei­dos al­so is hop­ing to score ear­ly with 12-month da­ta against the more sub­stan­tial 30-month out­come da­ta that Pfiz­er al­ready has on hand. Ku­mar coun­ters, though, that his team will be able to demon­strate im­proved ef­fi­ca­cy where it counts with the spe­cial­ists who mat­ter the most. Then they can fol­low up with ri­val 30-month da­ta to seal the deal.

There are, of course, no guar­an­tees that he’s right.

We’ll see how this plays out.

Fangliang Zhang, AP Images

UP­DAT­ED: Leg­end fetch­es $424 mil­lion, emerges as biggest win­ner yet in pan­dem­ic IPO boom as shares soar

Amid a flurry of splashy pandemic IPOs, a J&J-partnered Chinese biotech has emerged with one of the largest public raises in biotech history.

Legend Biotech, the Nanjing-based CAR-T developer, has raised $424 million on NASDAQ. The biotech had originally filed for a still-hefty $350 million, based on a range of $18-$20, but managed to fetch $23 per share, allowing them to well-eclipse the massive raises from companies like Allogene, Juno, Galapagos, though they’ll still fall a few dollars short of Moderna’s record-setting $600 million raise from 2018.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 83,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

As it hap­pened: A bid­ding war for an an­tibi­ot­ic mak­er in a mar­ket that has rav­aged its peers

In a bewildering twist to the long-suffering market for antibiotics — there has actually been a bidding war for an antibiotic company: Tetraphase.

It all started back in March, when the maker of Xerava (an FDA approved therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections) said it had received an offer from AcelRx for an all-stock deal valued at $14.4 million.

The offer was well-timed. Xerava was approved in 2018, four years after Tetraphase posted its first batch of pivotal trial data, and sales were nowhere near where they needed to be in order for the company to keep its head above water.

Is a pow­er­house Mer­ck team prepar­ing to leap past Roche — and leave Gilead and Bris­tol My­ers be­hind — in the race to TIG­IT dom­i­na­tion?

Roche caused quite a stir at ASCO with its first look at some positive — but not so impressive — data for their combination of Tecentriq with their anti-TIGIT drug tiragolumab. But some analysts believe that Merck is positioned to make a bid — soon — for the lead in the race to a second-wave combo immuno-oncology approach with its own ambitious early-stage program tied to a dominant Keytruda.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Leen Kawas, Athira CEO (Athira)

Can a small biotech suc­cess­ful­ly tack­le an Ever­est climb like Alzheimer’s? Athi­ra has $85M and some in­flu­en­tial back­ers ready to give it a shot

There haven’t been a lot of big venture rounds for biotech companies looking to run a Phase II study in Alzheimer’s.

The field has been a disaster over the past decade. Amyloid didn’t pan out as a target — going down in a litany of Phase III failures — and is now making its last stand at Biogen. Tau is a comer, but when you look around and all you see is destruction, the idea of backing a startup trying to find complex cocktails to swing the course of this devilishly complicated memory-wasting disease would daunt the pluckiest investors.

GSK presents case to ex­pand use of its lu­pus drug in pa­tients with kid­ney dis­ease, but the field is evolv­ing. How long will the mo­nop­oly last?

In 2011, GlaxoSmithKline’s Benlysta became the first biologic to win approval for lupus patients. Nine years on, the British drugmaker has unveiled detailed positive results from a study testing the drug in lupus patients with associated kidney disease — a post-marketing requirement from the initial FDA approval.

Lupus is a drug developer’s nightmare. In the last six decades, there has been just one FDA approval (Benlysta), with the field resembling a graveyard in recent years with a string of failures including UCB and Biogen’s late-stage flop, as well as defeats in Xencor and Sanofi’s programs. One of the main reasons the success has eluded researchers is because lupus, akin to cancer, is not just one disease — it really is a disease of many diseases, noted Al Roy, executive director of Lupus Clinical Investigators Network, an initiative of New York-based Lupus Research Alliance that claims it is the world’s leading private funder of lupus research, in an interview.

Drug man­u­fac­tur­ing gi­ant Lon­za taps Roche/phar­ma ‘rein­ven­tion’ vet as its new CEO

Lonza chairman Albert Baehny took his time headhunting a new CEO for the company, making it absolutely clear he wanted a Big Pharma or biotech CEO with a good long track record in the business for the top spot. In the end, he went with the gold standard, turning to Roche’s ranks to recruit Pierre-Alain Ruffieux for the job.

Ruffieux, a member of the pharma leadership team at Roche, spent close to 5 years at the company. But like a small army of manufacturing execs, he gained much of his experience at the other Big Pharma in Basel, remaining at Novartis for 12 years before expanding his horizons.

Covid-19 roundup: Ab­b­Vie jumps in­to Covid-19 an­ti­body hunt; As­traZeneca shoots for 2B dos­es of Ox­ford vac­cine — with $750M from CEPI, Gavi

Another Big Pharma is entering the Covid-19 antibody hunt.

AbbVie has announced a collaboration with the Netherlands’ Utrecht University and Erasmus Medical Center and the Chinese-Dutch biotech Harbour Biomed to develop a neutralizing antibody that can treat Covid-19. The antibody, called 47D11, was discovered by AbbVie’s three partners, and AbbVie will support early preclinical work, while preparing for later preclinical and clinical development. Researchers described the antibody in Nature Communications last month.

President Donald Trump (left) and Moncef Slaoui, head of Operation Warp Speed (Alex Brandon, AP Images)

UP­DAT­ED: White House names fi­nal­ists for Op­er­a­tion Warp Speed — with 5 ex­pect­ed names and one no­table omis­sion

A month after word first broke of the Trump Administration’s plan to rapidly accelerate the development and production of a Covid-19 vaccine, the White House has selected the five vaccine candidates they consider most likely to succeed, The New York Times reported.

Most of the names in the plan, known as Operation Warp Speed, will come as little surprise to those who have watched the last four months of vaccine developments: Moderna, which was the first vaccine to reach humans and is now the furthest along of any US effort; J&J, which has not gone into trials but received around $500 million in funding from BARDA earlier this year; the joint AstraZeneca-Oxford venture which was granted $1.2 billion from BARDA two weeks ago; Pfizer, which has been working with the mRNA biotech BioNTech; and Merck, which just entered the race and expects to put their two vaccine candidates into humans later this year.

Pfiz­er’s Doug Gior­dano has $500M — and some ad­vice — to of­fer a cer­tain breed of 'break­through' biotech

So let’s say you’re running a cutting-edge, clinical-stage biotech, probably public, but not necessarily so, which could see some big advantages teaming up with some marquee researchers, picking up say $50 million to $75 million dollars in a non-threatening minority equity investment that could take you to the next level.

Doug Giordano might have some thoughts on how that could work out.

The SVP of business development at the pharma giant has helped forge a new fund called the Pfizer Breakthrough Growth Initiative. And he has $500 million of Pfizer’s money to put behind 7 to 10 — or so — biotech stocks that fit that general description.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 83,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.