With Trump’s new FDA com­mish nom­i­nee loom­ing, in­dus­try ex­ecs are keep­ing their fin­gers crossed for Scott Got­tlieb

Scott Got­tlieb

Last week Pres­i­dent Trump said he was just days away from an­nounc­ing an ab­solute­ly “fan­tas­tic” new FDA com­mis­sion­er. One who would cut up to 80% of the reg­u­la­tions around drug de­vel­op­ment, blaz­ing a short­er path to an ap­proval. One who would get ex­per­i­men­tal meds to dy­ing pa­tients, over­haul­ing time­lines and slash­ing de­vel­op­ment bud­gets.

By and large, the mes­sage has spurred more than a lit­tle trep­i­da­tion in the in­dus­try that the pres­i­dent, who has earned a rep­u­ta­tion for shoot­ing first and ask­ing ques­tions lat­er, was go­ing to rad­i­cal­ly change the ap­proval process at the FDA. And that might in­di­cate that lib­er­tar­i­an “seast­ead­er” Jim O’Neill — who has fa­mous­ly said that drugs should be ap­proved on safe­ty alone — has the in­side track with the new pres­i­dent.

But he’s not the in­dus­try’s first choice. That dis­tinc­tion ap­pears to be re­served al­most en­tire­ly for Scott Got­tlieb, the for­mer deputy com­mis­sion­er at the FDA un­der George W. Bush with a rep­u­ta­tion as a staunch con­ser­v­a­tive with no known ap­petite for toss­ing grenades in­to the reg­u­la­to­ry un­der­brush.

Mizuho Se­cu­ri­ties USA ran a quick sur­vey of 53 drug com­pa­nies ask­ing them which of the four can­di­dates men­tioned so far in the me­dia — Got­tlieb, O’Neill, Bal­a­ji Srini­vasan and Joseph Gul­fo — would get their vote.

Sev­en­ty-two per­cent picked Got­tlieb. The rest were al­so rans. O’Neill got a hand­ful of votes at 8%, with Gul­fo at 9% and Srini­vasan at a mere 2%. (Gul­fo has pro­mot­ed his own can­di­da­cy with­out any in­de­pen­dent con­fir­ma­tion from the Trump ad­min­is­tra­tion that he’s ever been a se­ri­ous can­di­date or been with­in 100 feet of the new pres­i­dent.)

In his week­ly roundup on Fri­day, Baird’s Bri­an Sko­r­ney came to the same con­clu­sion with­out any polling. He wrote: “We be­lieve in­dus­try and in­vestor sup­port is over­whelm­ing­ly in fa­vor of Scott Got­tlieb.”

“He leans right, he’s got ex­pe­ri­ence in the agency, he’s got the M.D. cre­den­tial, and he’s out­spo­ken,” Michael Ga­ba, fed­er­al pol­i­cy leader of law firm Hol­land & Knight’s na­tion­al Health­care & Life Sci­ences Team, told Reuters re­cent­ly.

I asked Ga­ba to elab­o­rate on that. And he sent me this:

When it comes to the FDA, bio­phar­ma, and reg­u­lat­ed in­dus­try as a whole, puts a pre­mi­um on pre­dictabil­i­ty, speed to mar­ket, and the abil­i­ty to make dif­fer­en­ti­at­ing claims in the mar­ket­place about their prod­ucts’ ef­fec­tive­ness to treat and mit­i­gate dis­ease.  Safe­ty is the giv­en once a prod­uct makes it through the FDA, and by it­self doesn’t dis­tin­guish prod­ucts in the mar­ket­place.  Among the FDA com­mis­sion­er can­di­dates we’ve read about, Dr. Got­tlieb is well known to in­dus­try and has the req­ui­site ex­pe­ri­ence and tal­ent to re­form and stream­line the FDA ap­proval process.

The theme among the oth­er can­di­dates ap­pears to be to speed prod­ucts to mar­ket by lim­it­ing the agency’s role to eval­u­at­ing safe­ty on­ly.  Not on­ly would this dy­nam­ic be chal­leng­ing to in­dus­try, providers and pa­tients, it would re­quire a statu­to­ry change to the FD­CA – and we all know that the leg­isla­tive process it­self can be very messy and un­pre­dictable.

Got­tlieb’s nom­i­na­tion would con­tin­ue a long­stand­ing tra­di­tion of nam­ing a trained physi­cian for the top job at the FDA. As a res­i­dent fel­low at the Amer­i­can En­ter­prise In­sti­tute, he’s kept the heat on Oba­macare through a se­ries of op-eds in high pro­file pub­li­ca­tions like the Wall Street Jour­nal. As a ven­ture part­ner at New En­ter­prise As­so­ci­ates he’s a board mem­ber at Me­dA­vante, which mar­kets soft­ware for an­a­lyz­ing clin­i­cal tri­al da­ta. And he’s an ad­vi­sor to Glax­o­SmithK­line, which has shown no ap­petite for rad­i­cal change in the way de­vel­op­ers prove a drug works.

It’s the kind of re­sume that would in­di­cate a sym­pa­thy for con­tin­u­ing to evolve reg­u­la­tions to speed de­vel­op­ment, but with­out any ap­petite for play­ing rev­o­lu­tion­ary.

Of course, that’s one rea­son why he may not get the job. Trump has glee­ful­ly named new cab­i­net mem­bers based on their hos­til­i­ty to the agen­cies they’ll be run­ning and the reg­u­la­tions they’ve been in­volved in cre­at­ing. And his ex­ec­u­tive or­der de­mand­ing the elim­i­na­tion of two rules for every new one un­der­scores his com­mit­ment to elim­i­nat­ing hun­dreds of pages of regs for every one that sur­vives.

Un­lock­ing ESG strate­gies for growth with Gilead Sci­ences

RBC Capital Markets explores what is material in ESG for biopharma companies with the ESG leads at Gilead Sciences. Gilead has long focused on sustainability but recognized a more robust framework was needed. Based on a materiality assessment, Gilead’s ESG strategy today focuses first on drug access and pricing, while also addressing D&I and climate change. Find out why Gilead’s board is “acutely aware” of the contribution that ESG makes to firm’s overall success.

What con­tro­ver­sy? Eli Lil­ly plots Alzheimer's BLA fil­ing lat­er this year as FDA taps more an­ti-amy­loid drugs as break­throughs

The FDA is keeping the good news coming for Alzheimer’s drug developers. And Eli Lilly is taking them up on it.

Amid continued controversy around whether Biogen’s new flagship drug, Aduhelm, should have been approved at all — and swelling, heated debates surrounding its $56,000 price tag — the agency had no issue handing them and their Japanese partner Eisai a breakthrough therapy designation for a second anti-amyloid beta antibody, lecanemab, late Wednesday.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 110,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

New FDA doc­u­ments show in­ter­nal dis­sent on Aduhelm ap­proval

In a lengthy review document and a pair of memos from top officials, the FDA released on Tuesday night its most detailed argument yet for approving Biogen’s intensely controversial Alzheimer’s drug aducanumab.

The documents amount to an agency attempt to quench the firestorm their decision kindled, as outside advisors members resigned and experts warned that an unproven drug now could stretch Medicare’s budget to a breaking point. Ultimately, the documents show how CDER director Patrizia Cavazzoni and Office of New Drugs director Peter Stein both concurred with FDA neuroscience head Billy Dunn on the accelerated approval while the staff at FDA’s Office of Biostatistics did not think an approval was warranted.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 110,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Hervé Hoppenot, Incyte CEO (Jeff Rumans)

ODAC echoes FDA con­cern over In­cyte PD-1, as Paz­dur sig­nals broad­er shift for ac­cel­er­at­ed ap­proval

After the FDA lambasted their PD-1 ahead of an adcomm earlier this week, Incyte ran into new trouble Thursday as ODAC panelists voted against an accelerated OK by a wide margin.

Members of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee recommended with a 13-4 vote to defer a regulatory decision on Incyte’s retifanlimab until after more data can be collected from a placebo-controlled trial. The PD-1 therapy is due for a PDUFA date in late July after receiving priority review earlier this year.

Karen Flynn, Catalent

Q&A: When the pan­dem­ic struck, Catal­en­t's CCO had just joined the team

Karen Flynn came aboard Catalent’s team just in time.

The company was going through a surge of changes, and she had been brought over from her role as CCO of West Pharmaceutical Services to serve in the same capacity for the New Jersey-based CDMO. Then a few months later, the pandemic was in full-force.

Since then, Catalent’s been in hyper-expansion mode. In early May, it acquired Promethera’s Hepatic Cell Therapy Support SA subsidiary and its 32,40-square-foot facility in Gosselies, Belgium. Prior to that, the company acquired Belgian CDMO Delphi Genetics, wrapped up the expansion of an already-existing site in Madison, WI and added an ultra-low temperature freezer partner in Sterling. As Emergent has botched millions of doses of AstraZeneca’s vaccine, the company has swooped in to move that production to its Maryland plant as well.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 110,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Richard Pazdur (vis AACR)

FDA en­cour­ages in­clud­ing in­cur­able can­cer pa­tients in tri­als, re­gard­less of pri­or ther­a­pies

The FDA on Thursday called to include those with incurable cancers (when there is no potential for cure or for prolonged/near normal survival) in appropriate clinical trials, regardless of whether they have received existing alternative treatments.

Historically, many cancer clinical trials have required that participating patients previously received multiple therapies, according to Richard Pazdur, director of the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence.

On heels of Aduhelm ap­proval, Bris­tol My­ers jumps back in­to Alzheimer's race

Bristol Myers Squibb last put major resources behind an Alzheimer’s drug nearly a decade ago, when their own attempt at targeting amyloid flamed out in mid-stage studies. They invented another molecule, a Tau-targeted antibody, but jettisoned it to Biogen in 2017 as they dropped out of neuroscience altogether.

But on Thursday, the New York pharma announced they were getting back in the game. Bristol Myers exercised an $80 million option to bring a tau-targeted antibody from Prothena into a Phase I study. The opt-in, which Bristol Myers triggered ahead of analyst expectations, opens the door for another $1.7 billion in milestones down the road.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 110,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

James Peyer, Cambrian

Can a cell ther­a­py treat mus­cu­lar dy­s­tro­phy? A Ger­man bil­lion­aire's an­ti-ag­ing start­up is try­ing to find out

Gene therapy companies have faced huge hurdles trying to deliver healthy genes into muscular dystrophy patients’ muscle cells, so here’s an idea: Why don’t we just replace the muscle cells themselves?

Over the last two years, Vita Therapeutics has been exploring that possibility, building on early stem cell work from Johns Hopkins professor Peter Andersen. And on Tuesday they announced a $32 million Series A to begin to move their first therapy into the clinic, where they hope it will help rebuild muscle in patients with a type of dystrophy that afflicts the arms and legs.

Emma Walmsley (GSK via investor day livestream)

Mul­ti­va­lent mR­NA vac­cines, I/O 3.0, long-act­ing HIV drugs: The $46B game is on for the new Glax­o­SmithK­line

To understand the new GlaxoSmithKline that Emma Walmsley is promising to usher in, one must see through the old GSK.

“We know this has been a company that has perennially disappointed when you look at the first half of the last decade,” the CEO said in one of her final remarks at the long-anticipated investor day.

But after four years of strategic transformation and investment, her top team is ready to take the wraps off a shiny new version of the Big Pharma that, among other things, will strive to deliver £33 billion ($46 billion) in annual sales by 2031. It will start with a planned demerger of the consumer health business into a separate company in the middle of next year, while the new GSK retains a 20% stake as a “short-term financial investment.”