Sage’s quick flip in­to PhI­II crash­es as lead drug fails bad­ly for rare type of seizures

Af­ter build­ing in­tense in­ter­est in its lead drug for su­per-re­frac­to­ry sta­tus epilep­ti­cus with da­ta from tiny stud­ies, Sage Ther­a­peu­tics $SAGE says the drug failed bad­ly in Phase III.

Com­par­ing brex­anolone (SAGE-547) with a place­bo, the drug act­ed just like a sug­ar pill, with a 43.9% re­sponse for the drug com­pared to 42.4% in the place­bo arm — and a mis­er­able p-val­ue of 0.8775.

Sage’s shares dropped more than 20% on the news. But by the af­ter­noon the biotech had trimmed its loss­es, with the stock down about 14% — a mod­est re­treat giv­en the bad judg­ment this biotech has shown.

Jeff Jonas, Sage

Sage cre­at­ed both fierce be­liev­ers as well as even fiercer crit­ics of its drug for rare cas­es of pro­tract­ed seizures as CEO Jeff Jonas con­fi­dent­ly pre­dict­ed suc­cess. More than a year ago Sahm Ad­ran­gi’s Ker­ris­dale Cap­i­tal ex­e­cut­ed a short at­tack on Sage, caus­ti­cal­ly sum­ma­riz­ing its move from a small Phase I/II to a piv­otal tri­al as a strat­e­gy doomed to fail­ure.

Ker­ris­dale’s re­port picked apart da­ta from a sin­gle-arm study with no com­par­i­son group of pa­tients, which they be­lieve set the stage for the biotech to claim a big win with­out ac­tu­al­ly putting the ther­a­py to the test. And they add that there are ex­ist­ing ther­a­pies that go af­ter the ex­act same tar­get with sim­i­lar out­comes.

The fail­ure here will al­so cast a cloud over Sage’s oth­er R&D work, in­clud­ing a new drug for post­par­tum de­pres­sion which was al­so tout­ed with small stud­ies il­lus­trat­ing pos­i­tive re­sults.

But not every­one thinks the ug­ly flop here reads through to the rest of the pipeline. Notes Paul Mat­teis at Leerink:

The in­vest­ment de­bate this morn­ing cen­ters around the de­gree to which SRSE reads neg­a­tive­ly on­to the clin­i­cal po­ten­tial of SAGE-547 in PPD (and by ex­ten­sion oth­er mood dis­or­ders); while we un­der­stand that the lack of sig­nal in SRSE has ren­dered some in­vestors more cau­tious in their in­ter­pre­ta­tion of SAGE‘s many small CNS da­ta sets, for us, it’s hard to see a tan­gi­ble readthrough on­to PPD, which has (1) place­bo-con­trolled da­ta, (2) bet­ter un­der­stood nat­ur­al his­to­ry/place­bo ef­fects, and (3) break­through ther­a­py des­ig­na­tion.

As for Jonas, he still found rea­sons to ap­plaud the work.

“I’m proud of the Sage team for the sig­nif­i­cant progress they have made in im­prov­ing our un­der­stand­ing of how to best treat these crit­i­cal­ly ill pa­tients,” he said. “SRSE is a com­pli­cat­ed con­di­tion that is poor­ly un­der­stood, and I want to thank the pa­tients, their fam­i­lies, and the in­ves­ti­ga­tors who par­tic­i­pat­ed in the STA­TUS Tri­al. Al­though we did not meet the pri­ma­ry end­point, this first-ever tri­al in a high­ly vari­able and com­plex pa­tient pop­u­la­tion con­firms that re­search in a crit­i­cal care unit is pos­si­ble and deep­ens our un­der­stand­ing of GA­BA mech­a­nisms and their ef­fect on brain cir­cuit­ry. As we con­tin­ue ex­am­in­ing da­ta from the STA­TUS Tri­al in the com­ing weeks, I’m hope­ful this in­for­ma­tion will in­form cur­rent treat­ments, and aid in the de­vel­op­ment of fu­ture treat­ments for pa­tients with SRSE.”

It’s fi­nal­ly over: Bio­gen, Ei­sai scrap big Alzheimer’s PhI­I­Is af­ter a pre­dictable BACE cat­a­stro­phe rais­es safe­ty fears

Months after analysts and investors called on Biogen and Eisai to scrap their BACE drug for Alzheimer’s and move on in the wake of a string of late-stage failures and rising safety fears, the partners have called it quits. And they said they were dropping the drug — elenbecestat — after the independent monitoring board raised concerns about…safety.

We don’t know exactly what researchers found in this latest catastrophe, but the companies noted in their release that investigators had determined that the drug was flunking the risk/benefit analysis.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

It's not per­fect, but it's a good start: FDA pan­elists large­ly en­dorse Aim­mune's peanut al­ler­gy ther­a­py

Two days after a fairly benign review from FDA staff, an independent panel of experts largely endorsed the efficacy and safety of Aimmune’s peanut allergy therapy, laying the groundwork for approval with a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS).

Traditionally, peanut allergies are managed by avoidance, but the threat of accidental exposure cannot be nullified. Some allergists have devised a way to dose patients off-label with peanut protein derived from supermarket products to wean them off their allergies. But the idea behind Aimmune’s product was to standardize the peanut protein, and track the process of desensitization — so when accidental exposure in the real world invariably occurs, patients are less likely to experience a life-threatening allergic reaction.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Lisa M. DeAngelis, MSKCC

MSK picks brain can­cer ex­pert Lisa DeAn­ge­lis as its next CMO — fol­low­ing José Basel­ga’s con­tro­ver­sial ex­it

It’s official. Memorial Sloan Kettering has picked a brain cancer expert as its new physician-in-chief and CMO, replacing José Baselga, who left under a cloud after being singled out by The New York Times and ProPublica for failing to properly air his lucrative industry ties.

His replacement, who now will be in charge of MSK’s cutting-edge research work as well as the cancer care delivered by hundreds of practitioners, is Lisa M. DeAngelis. DeAngelis had been chair of the neurology department and co-founder of MSK’s brain tumor center and was moved in to the acting CMO role in the wake of Baselga’s departure.

Penn team adapts CAR-T tech, reengi­neer­ing mouse cells to treat car­diac fi­bro­sis

After establishing itself as one of the pioneer research centers in the world for CAR-T cancer therapies, creating new attack vehicles to eradicate cancer cells, a team at Penn Medicine has begun the tricky transition of using the basic technology for heart repair work.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Tal Zaks. Moderna

The mR­NA uni­corn Mod­er­na has more ear­ly-stage hu­man da­ta it wants to show off — reach­ing new peaks in prov­ing the po­ten­tial

The whole messenger RNA field has attracted billions of dollars in public and private investor cash gambled on the prospect of getting in on the ground floor. And this morning Boston-based Moderna, one of the leaders in the field, wants to show off a few more of the cards it has to play to prove to you that they’re really in the game.

The whole hand, of course, has yet to be dealt. And there’s no telling who gets to walk with a share of the pot. But any cards on display at this point — especially after being accused of keeping its deck under lock and key — will attract plenty of attention from some very wary, and wired, observers.

“In terms of the complexity and unmet need,” says Tal Zaks, the chief medical officer, “this is peak for what we’ve accomplished.”

Moderna has two Phase I studies it wants to talk about now.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Sanofi takes a $260M hit to ex­tri­cate it­self from a dis­as­trous al­liance with Lex­i­con

Sanofi spent $300 million in cash to get into a $1.7 billion alliance with Lexicon on their SGLT1/2 diabetes drug sotagliflozin. And now that the drug has been spurned by the FDA after burning through a program that provided mixed late-stage data and a late shot at a last-place finish, the French pharma giant is forking over another $260 million to get out of the deal.

Sanofi’s unhappiness was already apparent when the company — now under new CEO Paul Hudson — posted a statement back in July that they were dropping the deal. But it wasn’t that simple. 

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Rit­ter bombs fi­nal PhI­II for sole lac­tose in­tol­er­ance drug — shares plum­met

More than two years ago Ritter Pharmaceuticals managed to find enough silver lining in its Phase IIb/III study — after missing the top-line mark — to propel its lactose intolerance toward a confirmatory trial. But as it turned out, the enthusiasm only set the biotech and its investors up to be sorely disappointed.

This time around there’s little left to salvage. Not only did RP-G28 fail to beat placebo in reducing lactose intolerance symptoms, patients in the treatment group actually averaged a smaller improvement. On a composite score measuring symptoms like abdominal pain, cramping, bloating and gas, patients given the drug had a mean reduction of 3.159 while the placebo cohort saw a 3.420 drop on average (one-sided p-value = 0.0106).

Ear­ly snap­shot of Ad­verum's eye gene ther­a­py sparks con­cern about vi­sion loss

An early-stage update on Adverum Biotechnologies’ intravitreal gene therapy has triggered investor concern, after patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) saw their vision deteriorate, despite signs that the treatment is improving retinal anatomy.

Adverum, on Wednesday, unveiled 24-week data from the OPTIC trial of its experimental therapy, ADVM-022, in six patients who have been administered with one dose of the therapy. On average, patients in the trial had severe disease with an average of 6.2 anti-VEGF injections in the eight months prior to screening and an average annualized injection frequency of 9.3 injections.

Alex Ar­faei trades his an­a­lyst's post for a new role as biotech VC; Sanofi vet heads to Vi­for

Too often, Alex Arfaei arrived too late. 

An analyst at BMO Capital Markets, he’d meet with biotech or pharmaceutical heads for their IPO or secondary funding and his brain, trained on a biology degree and six years at Merck and Endo, would spring with questions: Why this biomarker? Why this design? Why not this endpoint? Not that he could do anything about it. These execs were coming for clinical money; their decisions had been made and finalized long ago.