Six years af­ter a spec­tac­u­lar de­but, Warp Dri­ve Bio is pow­er­ing down and hand­ing its 'un­drug­gable' am­bi­tions over to Rev­o­lu­tion

Close to six years af­ter Third Rock launched Warp Dri­ve Bio with a big-mon­ey col­lab­o­ra­tion from Sanofi and am­bi­tious plans to drug the un­drug­gable with new tech out of Har­vard, the biotech has reached the end of the line as an in­de­pen­dent op­er­a­tion. 

To­day Warp Dri­ve is dis­patch­ing its pipeline to an­oth­er Third Rock start­up com­pa­ny, Rev­o­lu­tion Med­i­cines, with the CEOs of both com­pa­nies in­sist­ing that this is a win-win for all in­volved, though Warp Dri­ve nev­er ac­tu­al­ly made the leap in­to the clin­ic.

Lau­rence Reid

Pressed on the point, Warp Dri­ve CEO Lau­rence Reid con­cedes that every de­ci­sion like this has its “up­sides and down­sides,” but he in­sists that the de­ci­sion by the board rep­re­sents the best path for­ward for in­vestors as well as the med­i­cines they have been toil­ing on since 2012.

Warp Dri­ve was a biotech child of its time. The com­pa­ny boast­ed of a ”ge­nom­ic search en­gine” that “en­ables hid­den nat­ur­al prod­ucts to be re­vealed on the ba­sis of their dis­tinc­tive ge­nom­ic sig­na­ture.” And with the likes of Greg Ver­dine — who left to do 2 new star­tups — and George Church out of Har­vard be­hind it, there were plen­ty of be­liev­ers.

What­ev­er the two CEOs say to­day about all the pos­i­tives be­hind the deal, any biotech com­pa­ny that goes six years with­out get­ting in­to the clin­ic — or an­nounc­ing plans to — is like­ly to get a thor­ough re­view from in­vestors. Reid, though, says that Third Rock and the oth­er in­vestors were will­ing to go back in­to a Se­ries B, the orig­i­nal plan for fi­nanc­ing the next step, be­fore the board set this new path out.

The fate of the 43 staffers?

Mark Gold­smith

That’s still to be de­cid­ed, says CEO Mark Gold­smith of Rev­o­lu­tion, which on­ly re­cent­ly un­der­went a tran­si­tion to on­col­o­gy af­ter aban­don­ing its ear­ly work on an an­ti-fun­gal. Ob­vi­ous­ly, he added, not every­one will make the jump from the East to the West Coast where Rev­o­lu­tion is based, and that in it­self will mean some re­duc­tion in staff.

The big Sanofi col­lab­o­ra­tions that were her­ald­ed in an­tibi­otics and on­col­o­gy? Those end­ed in 2017 and 2016, says Reid. And the lights went out on those part­ner­ships with­out any of the rah-rah that at­tend­ed their ar­rival.

Sanofi cur­rent­ly has 40% of the eq­ui­ty in Warp Dri­ve, with no rights to any of its prod­ucts.

How much is that worth af­ter the deal goes through, with Rev­o­lu­tion hand­ing out stock to in­vestors?

They aren’t say­ing.

The two oth­er col­lab­o­ra­tions that were formed with Glax­o­SmithK­line and Roche, which front­ed $87 mil­lion for the up­front and pre­clin­i­cal mile­stones? Con­tin­u­ing un­der re­view, to be de­cid­ed on lat­er, af­ter Rev­o­lu­tion’s ex­ec team “de­ter­mines its busi­ness strat­e­gy for the genome min­ing plat­form.”

Gold­smith al­so hit a va­ri­ety of up­beat notes about the deal, say­ing this would bring to­geth­er two high­ly com­ple­men­tary pipelines and al­low a more rapid de­vel­op­ment of the Warp Dri­ve as­sets.

Asked when the most ad­vanced Warp Dri­ve pro­gram could ex­pect to en­ter the clin­ic, Gold­smith replied that they aren’t pro­vid­ing time­lines.

 

BY­OD Best Prac­tices: How Mo­bile De­vice Strat­e­gy Leads to More Pa­tient-Cen­tric Clin­i­cal Tri­als

Some of the most time- and cost-consuming components of clinical research center on gathering, analyzing, and reporting data. To improve efficiency, many clinical trial sponsors have shifted to electronic clinical outcome assessments (eCOA), including electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) tools.

In most cases, patients enter data using apps installed on provisioned devices. At a time when 81% of Americans own a smartphone, why not use the device they rely on every day?

Image: Shutterstock

Eli Lil­ly asks FDA to re­voke EUA for Covid-19 treat­ment

Eli Lilly on Friday requested that the FDA revoke the emergency authorization for its Covid-19 drug bamlanivimab, which is no longer as effective as a combo therapy because of a rise in coronavirus variants across the US.

“With the growing prevalence of variants in the U.S. that bamlanivimab alone may not fully neutralize, and with sufficient supply of etesevimab, we believe now is the right time to complete our planned transition and focus on the administration of these two neutralizing antibodies together,” Daniel Skovronsky, Lilly’s CSO, said in a statement.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 107,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Osman Kibar (Samumed, now Biosplice)

Os­man Kibar lays down his hand at Sa­mumed, step­ping away from CEO role as his once-her­ald­ed an­ti-ag­ing biotech re­brands

Samumed made quite the entrance back in 2016, when it launched with some anti-aging programs and a whopping $12 billion valuation. That level of fanfare was nowhere to be found on Thursday, when the company added another $120 million to its coffers and quietly changed its name to Biosplice Therapeutics.

Why the sudden rebrand?

“We did that for obvious reasons,” CFO and CBO Erich Horsley told Endpoints News. “The name Biosplice echoes our science much more than Samumed does.”

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 107,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

J&J faces CDC ad­vi­so­ry com­mit­tee again next week to weigh Covid-19 vac­cine risks

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices punted earlier this week on deciding whether or not to recommend lifting a pause on the administration of J&J’s Covid-19 vaccine, but the committee will meet again in an emergency session next Friday to discuss the safety issues further.

The timing of the meeting likely means that the J&J vaccine will not return to the US market before the end of next week as the FDA looks to work hand-in-hand with the CDC to ensure the benefits of the vaccine still outweigh the risks for all age groups.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 107,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Ex­clu­sive in­ter­view: Pe­ter Marks on why full Covid-19 vac­cine ap­provals could be just months away

Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, took time out of his busy schedule last Friday to discuss with Endpoints News all things related to his work regulating vaccines and the pandemic.

Marks, who quietly coined the name “Operation Warp Speed” before deciding to stick with his work regulating vaccines at the FDA rather than join the Trump-era program, has been the face of vaccine regulation for the FDA throughout the pandemic, and is usually spotted in Zoom meetings seated in front of his wife’s paintings.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Near­ly a year af­ter Au­den­tes' gene ther­a­py deaths, the tri­al con­tin­ues. What hap­pened re­mains a mys­tery

Natalie Holles was five months into her tenure as Audentes CEO and working to smooth out a $3 billion merger when the world crashed in.

Holles and her team received word on the morning of May 5 that, hours before, a patient died in a trial for their lead gene therapy. They went into triage mode, alerting the FDA, calling trial investigators to begin to understand what happened, and, the next day, writing a letter to alert the patient community so they would be the first to know. “We wanted to be as forthright and transparent as possible,” Holles told me late last month.

The brief letter noted two other patients also suffered severe reactions after receiving a high dose of the therapy and were undergoing treatment. One died a month and a half later, at which point news of the deaths became public, jolting an emergent gene therapy field and raising questions about the safety of the high doses Audentes and others were now using. The third patient died in August.

“It was deeply saddening,” Holles said. “But I was — we were — resolute and determined to understand what happened and learn from it and get back on track.”

Eleven months have now passed since the first death and the therapy, a potential cure for a rare and fatal muscle-wasting disease called X-linked myotubular myopathy, is back on track, the FDA having cleared the company to resume dosing at a lower level. Audentes itself is no more; last month, Japanese pharma giant Astellas announced it had completed working out the kinks of the $3 billion merger and had restructured and rebranded the subsidiary as Astellas Gene Therapies. Holles, having successfully steered both efforts, departed.

Still, questions about precisely what led to the deaths of the 3 boys still linger. Trial investigators released key details about the case last August and December, pointing to a biological landmine that Audentes could not have seen coming — a moment of profound medical misfortune. In an emerging field that’s promised cures for devastating diseases but also seen its share of safety setbacks, the cases provided a cautionary tale.

Audentes “contributed in a positive way by giving a painful but important example for others to look at and learn from,” Terry Flotte, dean of the UMass School of Medicine and editor of the journal Human Gene Therapy, told me. “I can’t see anything they did wrong.”

Yet some researchers say they’re still waiting on Astellas to release more data. The company has yet to publish a full paper detailing what happened, nor have they indicated that they will. In the meantime, it remains unclear what triggered the events and how to prevent them in the future.

“Since Audentes was the first one and we don’t have additional information, we’re kind of in a holding pattern, flying around, waiting to figure out how to land our vehicles,” said Jude Samulski, professor of pharmacology at UNC’s Gene Therapy Center and CSO of the gene therapy biotech AskBio, now a subsidiary of Bayer.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Pascal Soriot (AstraZeneca via YouTube)

Af­ter be­ing goad­ed to sell the com­pa­ny, Alex­ion's CEO set some am­bi­tious new goals for in­vestors. Then Pas­cal So­ri­ot came call­ing

Back in the spring of 2020, Alexion $ALXN CEO Ludwig Hantson was under considerable pressure to perform and had been for months. Elliott Advisers had been applying some high public heat on the biotech’s numbers. And in reaching out to some major stockholders, one thread of advice came through loud and clear: Sell the company or do something dramatic to change the narrative.

In the words of the rather dry SEC filing that offers a detailed backgrounder on the buyout deal, Alexion stated: ‘During the summer and fall of 2020, Alexion also continued to engage with its stockholders, and in these interactions, several stockholders encouraged the company to explore strategic alternatives.’

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 107,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Alex Leech, Alchemab CEO (SV Health Investors)

Alchemab bags fresh round of in­vestor for tar­get-ag­nos­tic an­ti­body de­vel­op­ment for Hunt­ing­ton's, Covid-19

With a “target-agnostic” approach to antibody development, the UK’s Alchemab has used lessons learned from patients with resistance to certain diseases to chase after conditions as far apart as Huntington’s and Covid-19. Now, investors are jumping on board the concept with an $86 million Series A.

The proceeds will go toward advancing the company’s target-agnostic drug discovery program, a release said. That approach looks at the antibody repertoires of patients who show resistance to typically destructive diseases regardless of genetic disposition.

Craig Parker, Surrozen CEO

The world of Wnt heads to Nas­daq as Sur­rozen an­nounces a $212M SPAC deal

Editor’s note: Interested in following biopharma’s fast-paced IPO market? You can bookmark our IPO Tracker here.

Another day, another SPAC merger in the world of biotech.

Less than 24 hours after Tango Therapeutics announced its own leap to Nasdaq through the blank check route, Surrozen has decided to take a similar step. The Wnt pathway-focused biotech is reverse-merging with Consonance Capital Management’s SPAC in a $212 million deal, which includes $92 million from the shell company and $120 million in PIPE financing.