Spun out of George Church's lab, this biotech up­start is map­ping the AAV uni­verse for No­var­tis, Sarep­ta to gaze

In a few days, through a se­ries of video con­fer­ences, gene ther­a­py re­searchers around the world will be pre­sent­ing their lat­est find­ings at the vir­tu­al an­nu­al meet­ing of the Amer­i­can So­ci­ety of Gene & Cell Ther­a­py. Al­most every dis­cus­sion will fea­ture a top­ic that has been cen­tral to the ex­is­tence of the field but con­tin­ues to per­plex ex­perts as they seek to re­fine the modal­i­ty: the de­liv­ery of a gene to the tis­sue where it’s need­ed to fix dis­ease.

For the first time, a biotech up­start will be pub­licly out­lin­ing their take on the prob­lem — with an ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gence fla­vor that No­var­tis and Sarep­ta are gob­bling up.

Sea­soned at­ten­dees of AS­GCT would rec­og­nize the team be­hind Dyno Ther­a­peu­tics. Since Er­ic Kel­sic be­gan build­ing the plat­form in 2015 as a post­doc at George Church’s il­lus­tri­ous lab at Wyss In­sti­tute, he’s been mak­ing the rounds at sci­en­tif­ic meet­ings. At Har­vard, his group had demon­strat­ed how — by do­ing high through­put screen­ing on all cap­sid vari­ants of one par­tic­u­lar AAV serotype, mod­el­ing the space with ma­chine learn­ing, and fi­nal­ly build­ing a pro­file of each cap­sid that can be ranked by dif­fer­ent at­trib­ut­es — they could point to syn­thet­ic AAV cap­sid can­di­dates that are su­pe­ri­or to the hand­ful of nat­ur­al vari­ants cur­rent­ly in use.

Alan Crane

“This was by far the best ap­pli­ca­tion that I’d ever seen of AI in bi­ol­o­gy,” Alan Crane, an en­tre­pre­neur part­ner at Po­laris and Dyno’s ex­ec­u­tive chair­man, told End­points News. “It turns out po­ten­tial part­ners were see­ing it the same way, be­cause when Er­ic came to me back in mid-2018, he al­ready had this list of lit­er­al­ly dozens of com­pa­nies that have proac­tive­ly ap­proached him.”

Out of that pool Dyno had picked No­var­tis for a col­lab­o­ra­tion on eye dis­or­ders and Sarep­ta to team up on mus­cle dis­eases. Up­front pay­ments, sup­port, op­tion fees and mile­stones from these two deals could add up to $2 bil­lion, in­clud­ing $40 mil­lion from the re­search phase of the Sarep­ta deal.

Louise Rodi­no-Kla­pac

“We al­ways con­stant­ly try to make sure that we are ahead of the curve in terms of our tech­nol­o­gy and look­ing at next-gen­er­a­tion treat­ments,” Louise Rodi­no-Kla­pac, Sarep­ta’s head of gene ther­a­py, said. “So al­though we’re very hap­py with our cur­rent ap­proach and our cur­rent vec­tor, we’re think­ing about the fu­ture po­ten­tial tech­nolo­gies for oth­er mus­cu­lar dy­s­tro­phies.”

Cap­sids — the pro­tein shells that en­close ge­net­ic ma­te­r­i­al of a virus — is one of three core com­po­nents need­ed to form a gene ther­a­py, she ex­plained, along­side the trans­gene that’s miss­ing or de­fec­tive in a pa­tient, and a pro­mot­er that turns the gene on in the cell. And small tweaks to the cap­sid can trans­late to pro­found changes in the fi­nal prod­uct’s im­muno­genic­i­ty, man­u­fac­tura­bil­i­ty, ef­fi­cien­cy of de­liv­ery, speci­fici­ty to tar­get cells and pack­age size.

Er­ic Kel­sic

All of these met­rics are tak­en in­to con­sid­er­a­tion on Dyno’s Cap­sidMap plat­form, which takes “the most com­pre­hen­sive ap­proach to map­ping out the AAV uni­verse,” fill­ing the gaps in each galaxy and telling stars from pure void, Kel­sic said.

“We don’t want to im­prove one prop­er­ty but have oth­er things get worse,” a chal­lenge that oth­ers who have at­tempt­ed to solve the prob­lem have faced, he added.

With a new tech­nol­o­gy that promis­es to op­ti­mize vi­ral vec­tors for in­di­vid­ual ap­pli­ca­tions like that, Crane pre­dict­ed the com­pa­ny — which Po­laris seed­ed with a mod­est $9 mil­lion — might nev­er need ad­di­tion­al ven­ture funds.

While Dyno re­tains the op­tion to cre­ate its own ther­a­pies, ex­pect part­ner­ships (and there are more com­ing) to re­main at the cen­ter for a while.

“What I’ve ob­served in the in­dus­try — not on­ly in gene ther­a­py but in all ar­eas — is as com­pa­nies start to move in­to pipelines, they usu­al­ly have to leave the plat­form be­hind,” Crane said.

Much work is to be done. Dyno cur­rent­ly has ca­pac­i­ty to screen hun­dreds of thou­sands to mil­lions of cap­sids and test them both in vit­ro and in vi­vo, but the plan is to scale up the in­fra­struc­ture even fur­ther — both on the ex­per­i­men­tal and the com­pu­ta­tion­al fronts. The head­count is dou­bling from rough­ly 20 while all the ma­chine learn­ing gets moved on­to the cloud.

A can­di­date won’t emerge any time soon, and even when it does ma­te­ri­al­ize it would have to go through rig­or­ous safe­ty test­ing at the part­ners’ own R&D op­er­a­tions — a process that could take an­oth­er one or two years. Still, Kel­sic sees it as the quick­est way to bring their work to pa­tients even while they fig­ure new things out.

“Es­pe­cial­ly when we’re think­ing about tech­nol­o­gy, some­thing George and I talked a lot about when we start­ed this project, it still feels re­al­ly ear­ly days for gene ther­a­py,” he said. “There’s so much po­ten­tial.”

Im­ple­ment­ing re­silience in the clin­i­cal tri­al sup­ply chain

Since January 2020, the clinical trials ecosystem has quickly evolved to manage roadblocks impeding clinical trial integrity, and patient care and safety amid a global pandemic. Closed borders, reduced air traffic and delayed or canceled flights disrupted global distribution, revealing how flexible logistics and supply chains can secure the timely delivery of clinical drug products and therapies to sites and patients.

In fi­nal days at Mer­ck, Roger Perl­mut­ter bets big on a lit­tle-known Covid-19 treat­ment

Roger Perlmutter is spending his last days at Merck, well, spending.

Two weeks after snapping up the antibody-drug conjugate biotech VelosBio for $2.75 billion, Merck announced today that it had purchased OncoImmune and its experimental Covid-19 drug for $425 million. The drug, known as CD24Fc, appeared to reduce the risk of respiratory failure or death in severe Covid-19 patients by 50% in a 203-person Phase III trial, OncoImmune said in September.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Pascal Soriot (AP Images)

UP­DAT­ED: As­traZeneca, Ox­ford on the de­fen­sive as skep­tics dis­miss 70% av­er­age ef­fi­ca­cy for Covid-19 vac­cine

On the third straight Monday that the world wakes up to positive vaccine news, AstraZeneca and Oxford are declaring a new Phase III milestone in the fight against the pandemic. Not everyone is convinced they will play a big part, though.

With an average efficacy of 70%, the headline number struck analysts as less impressive than the 95% and 94.5% protection that Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have boasted in the past two weeks, respectively. But the British partners say they have several other bright spots going for their candidate. One of the two dosing regimens tested in Phase III showed a better profile, bringing efficacy up to 90%; the adenovirus vector-based vaccine requires minimal refrigeration, which may mean easier distribution; and AstraZeneca has pledged to sell it at a fraction of the price that the other two vaccine developers are charging.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Bob Nelsen (Photo by Michael Kovac/Getty Images)

Bob Nelsen rais­es $800M and re­cruits a star-stud­ded board to build the 'Fox­con­n' of biotech

Bob Nelsen spent his pandemic spring in his Seattle home, talking on the phone with Luciana Borio, the scientist who used to run pandemic preparedness on the National Security Council, and fuming with her about the dire state of American manufacturing.

Companies were rushing to develop vaccines and antibodies for the new virus, but even if they succeeded, there was no immediate supply chain or infrastructure to mass-produce them in a way that could make a dent in the outbreak.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Feng Tian, Ambrx CEO (Ambrx)

Af­ter 5 qui­et years, a for­mer Scripps spin­out rais­es $200M and an­nounces plans to try again at an IPO

The first time San Diego biotech Ambrx tried to go public in 2014, they failed and the company’s board switched to a radically different strategy: They sold themselves for an undisclosed amount to a syndicate of Chinese investors and pharma companies.

Now, after 5 quiet years, that syndicate has raised a mountain of cash and indicated they’ll soon make another bid to go public.

Earlier this month, Ambrx raised $200 million in what they billed as a crossover round financed by Fidelity, BlackRock, Cormorant Asset Management, HBM Healthcare Investments, Invus, Adage Capital Partners and Suvretta Capital Management. It’s the largest amount they’ve ever raised and, according to Crunchbase figures, more than doubles the total amount of VC capital collected since their launch 17 years ago.

The ad­u­canum­ab co­nun­drum: The PhI­II failed a clear reg­u­la­to­ry stan­dard, but no one is cer­tain what that means any­more at the FDA

Eighteen days ago, virtually all of the outside experts on an FDA adcomm got together to mug the agency’s Billy Dunn and the Biogen team when they presented their upbeat assessment on aducanumab. But here we are, more than 2 weeks later, and the ongoing debate over that Alzheimer’s drug’s fate continues unabated.

Instead of simply ruling out any chance of an approval, the logical conclusion based on what we heard during that session, a series of questionable approvals that preceded the controversy over the agency’s recent EUA decisions has come back to haunt the FDA, where the power of precedent is leaving an opening some experts believe can still be exploited by the big biotech.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Pur­due Phar­ma pleads guilty in fed­er­al Oxy­Con­tin probe, for­mal­ly rec­og­niz­ing it played a part in the opi­oid cri­sis

Purdue Pharma, the producer of the prescription painkiller OxyContin, admitted Tuesday that, yes, it did contribute to America’s opioid epidemic.

The drugmaker formally pleaded guilty to three criminal charges, the AP reported, including getting in the way of the DEA’s efforts to combat the crisis, failing to prevent the painkillers from ending up on the black market and encouraging doctors to write more painkiller prescriptions through two methods: paying them in a speakers program and directing a medical records company to send them certain patient information. Purdue’s plea deal calls for $8.3 billion in criminal fines and penalties, but the company is only liable for a fraction of that total — $225 million.

News brief­ing: Gilead part­ner Gala­pa­gos sells off CRO for $37M; Polyphor bags $3.3M from CF Foun­da­tion

Close Gilead ally Galapagos is selling off one of its contract research organizations to a Polish pharma company.

Galapagos has agreed to sell 100% of the outstanding shares in the CRO Fidelta to Selvita, in a deal worth roughly $37 million expected to close in the first week of January. The acquisition is expected to nearly double Selvita’s revenues, the company says, as well as expand its drug discovery efforts.

Gen­mab ax­es an ADC de­vel­op­ment pro­gram af­ter the da­ta fail to im­press

Genmab $GMAB has opted to ax one of its antibody-drug conjugates after watching it flop in the clinic.

The Danish biotech reported Tuesday that it decided to kill their program for enapotamab vedotin after the data gathered from expansion cohorts failed to measure up. According to the company:

While enapotamab vedotin has shown some evidence of clinical activity, this was not optimized by different dose schedules and/or predictive biomarkers. Accordingly, the data from the expansion cohorts did not meet Genmab’s stringent criteria for proof-of-concept.