Deals Of The Week: Academic Drug-Discovery Alliance Capturing Industry's Notice

Nashville hosted the first annual conference of the Academic Drug Discovery Consortium

It’s become a familiar story in biopharma, as Big Pharma X announces that in the wake of the patent cliff, health care-spending pressures in Europe and diminished returns from internal R&D, it will be forced to cut back on R&D spending and make staff reductions primarily in sales and lab positions.

As the industry retrenches on early drug-discovery work, however, the need for innovation has not diminished and so the private sector frequently looks more and more to the academy for early research breakthroughs that might translate into therapies that will bolster the quarterly earnings reports a decade from now. In an effort to take advantage of that trend, some of the more forward-thinking university-based drug-discovery outfits in the U.S. have banded together to create a consortium they hope will facilitate and ease partnerships between academic institutions and the biopharmaceutical industry.

The brainchild of a meeting in Baltimore two autumns ago, the Academic Drug Discovery Consortium was more or less dreamed up by Barbara Slusher, director of the Translational Program at the Brain Science Institute at Johns Hopkins University, and Jeffrey Conn, director of the Vanderbilt Center for Neuroscience Drug Discovery, with input from three other founding institutions: University of North Carolina, Harvard University and University of California, San Francisco.

But in a relatively short time, ADDC’s membership has grown to 83 institutions, including six outside the U.S., and more than 550 individual members. And, just as importantly, big pharma has taken notice.

“They started out with two groups, Vanderbilt and Johns Hopkins, and now they have 83 members,” said Bruce Harris, Roche’s director of academic alliances and an attendee and speaker at ADDC’s first annual conference Oct. 9-11 in Nashville.” All of these institutions are trying to incorporate drug discovery and translate some of the biological discoveries occurring in their laboratories into drug-discovery projects and, if you think about it, that’s an incredible resource for the industry and the early portion of our pipelines.”

It is a necessary development as well. “The area I work in, CNS, probably has been hit the hardest because it’s a risk area where companies are decreasing their internal efforts and several companies have just gotten out (altogether),” said Slusher, co-founder and president of ADDC.

She and Harris both point to an increased government funding interest in translational research that has occurred more or less in tandem with private industry’s cutbacks in discovery work. Specifically, they site the NIH Roadmap efforts undertaken during the tenure of former NIH Director Elias Zerhouni. “This has been a major change in the pharmaceutical industry,” Slusher said. “But as pharma has been decreasing some of its internal efforts, simultaneously what you see is NIH increasing its interest in activities in discovery and translation.”

While overall NIH funding has been roughly flat in recent years, she noted, funding for its National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) was increased by 11% for federal fiscal year 2013.

ADDC also reflects the exponential growth taking place in academic drug discovery. There were six U.S. academic institutions performing drug-discovery research in 1990, a number that had nearly tripled as of a decade ago. Now, there are more than 100 such units, and 78 of them have membership in ADDC, Slusher pointed out.

In addition to its domestic members, ADDC also has drawn the support of six international research outfits – the Centre of Applied Medical Research at the University of Navarra in Spain, the Karolinska Institute’s Chemical Biology Consortium Sweden, the genetic engineering and biotechnology labs at Shaqra University in Saudi Arabia, the Platform of Chemical Biology and ADME at the University of Strasbourg in France, the Spanish National Cancer Research Centre and Cancer Research UK.

While ADDC has a focus on facilitating partnerships with the private sector, Harris thinks another important role it can play is fostering research efforts across national borders. “I could easily see these U.S.-based academic institutions collaborating on drug-discovery work with their European colleagues,” he said. “Science is global and so are economies, so for them to work together without national boundaries is just natural.”

As Roche searches for programs and assets to invest in at the academic level, Harris said his emphasis will be on the company’s therapeutic areas of focus – oncology, neuroscience and infectious disease. Those priorities dovetail well with what is occurring in U.S. academic research – of the ADDC centers, 73% say they work in oncology, 65% in infectious disease, 63% in neurological disorders and 45% in immunology.

One of ADDC’s initial goals is to create a searchable database of the projects being undertaken by member institutions. Both institutional and individual membership in ADDC is free, meaning this should be a significant resource for academic alliance seekers, like Roche’s Harris. (The organization also is not planning to take a cut from members’ tech transfer deals as a funding mechanism. Instead, it has lined up more than 20 biopharma and service provider firms to sponsor ADDC activities so far, Slusher said.)

Meanwhile, ADDC has no plans, in the near term at least, to serve as a central negotiating point for tech transfer deals or to develop uniform documents and practices for such transactions. Harris said right now that activity seems neither necessary nor terribly feasible.

“I’m not sure that it would be useful to standardize all of the legal documents and arrangements because each university has its own mission within a given state or [based upon] who is supporting it,” Harris added. “They have to go by their own regulations, so having a common set of documents across multiple tech transfer offices at U.S. universities would be a monumental challenge, I think, and probably expensive from a legal point of view.”

And while we await a slew of deals between ADDC member institutions and the biopharma industry, we present this week’s roundup of ....

MedImmune/Spirogen/ADC Therapeutics: AstraZeneca’s biologics unit MedImmune will expand its early oncology pipeline with a new platform to make potent antibody-drug conjugates through the acquisition of U.K.-based Spirogen. Britain’s second-biggest drug maker said it was acquiring privately held Spirogen Oct. 15, paying up $200 million upfront and with another $240 million in potential earn-outs based on predefined milestones for Spirogen’s ADC technology, which has the potential to directly target cancer tumors while protecting healthy cells. Spirogen has developed a novel class of cytotoxic “warheads” based on pyrrolobenzodiazepine (PBDs), which are DNA minor-grove binding agents that bind to specific sites of DNA in cancer cells, according to MedImmune. This blocks the cell division and growth without distorting the DNA helix of cancer cells, which potentially could prevent the emergence of drug resistance. AstraZeneca is in the midst of a concerted push in oncology under the direction of CEO Pascal Soriot, who has revamped the company’s R&D direction over the past year and selected oncology as one of three focal therapeutic areas for the company. MedImmune now is focused on two key areas in oncology development – ADCs and immune-mediated cancer therapy – and says the acquisition of Spirogen fits that strategy perfectly. In connection with the deal, AstraZeneca simultaneously announced a coinciding agreement with Swiss-based ADC Therapeutics, which has a licensing agreement with Spirogen. Under that arrangement AstraZeneca will pay $20 million to take an equity investment in the company. The investment will be matched by Auven Therapeutics, the majority shareholder in both ADC Therapeutics and Spirogen. AstraZeneca will collaborate with ADC Therapeutics to develop two programs from a defined list and pay an undisclosed upfront payment and development milestones. ADC Therapeutics will have a profit-sharing arrangement and gets the option to co-promote one of the products in the U.S. The products to be developed using Spirogen’s technology are preclinical assets, so the latest deal will not yield commercially viable new medicines for several years. It is not yet clear when the products could move forward into clinical tests. Spirogen has been developing its PBD technology for more than 10 years, including a standalone PBD agent in a Phase II study in acute myeloid leukemia. Its business model has been to partner its technology with pharma and biotech for use in the development of novel drugs. It has a number of industry collaborations, including collaborations with Genmab in June 2013, Genentech in 2011 and with ADC Therapeutics announced in 2012. - Sten Stovall

AstraZeneca/Taris Biomedical: Bladder-disease focused Taris Biomedical signed a research agreement with AstraZeneca Oct. 16 to work on novel treatments for bladder cancer. No financial details were disclosed, but the pharma gets an option to license any products resulting from the collaboration. The partnership will involve using Taris’ proprietary delivery platform in combination with targeted bladder cancer drugs developed by AstraZeneca. The Lexington, Mass.-based biotech says its technology involves a soft and flexible device that is deployed into and retrieved from the patient’s bladder “using standard urological office procedures.” The technology is designed to provide continuous local delivery of a therapeutic agent to the bladder for days or weeks. “Their novel technology has the potential to enable the delivery of the right drugs to the tumor tissue in the right concentration and over a prolonged period,” said Susan Galbraith, head of AstraZeneca’s Oncology Innovative Medicines Unit in a release. “This could combine the ability to target the right tissue – the tumor – with the right genetically targeted therapy and therefore represent a step change in the treatment of this disease.” Taris is a clinical-stage firm focused on developing therapies for bladder cancer, overactive bladder and interstitial cystitis. Its lead candidate, LiRIS, is in Phase II in interstitial cystitis. In April, the biotech raised $12.5 million in a Series C round funded by returning investors Flagship Ventures, Flybridge Capital Partners, Polaris Partners and Third Rock Ventures. - Joseph Haas

AmpliPhi Biosciences/University of Leicester: U.S. company AmpliPhi BioSciences announced an agreement Oct. 17 with a British academic group that has succeeded in identifying and characterizing bacteriophage (“phage”) that kill pathogenic strains of Clostridium difficile, a major cause of hospital-acquired severe diarrhea and vomiting. The University of Leicester  researchers will collaborate with AmpliPhi and another U.K. research team at the University of Glasgow on using the “bacteria-eating viruses” for clinical applications, with AmpliPhi funding the research, making milestone payments and paying royalties on any eventual products sales. In return, AmpliPhi receives rights to patents and intellectual property covering the Clostridium difficile-targeted phage research.
In a September 2013 report, the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention called C difficile an urgent threat, causing 250,000 infections every year in the U.S. AmpliPhi believes it is conducting the only phage-based development program for this critical condition. Phage could yield ideal candidates for treating gastrointestinal infections, as they infect and kill a specific strain or species of bacteria, and should not affect beneficial gut bacteria. The research agreement is the third by AmpliPhi in the past six months, having linked up previously with the synthetic biology company Intrexon and the U.S Army. AmpliPhi expects its first therapeutic phage-based product, targeting Staphylococcus aureus and developed in collaboration with the U.S. military, to enter clinical trials next year. AmpliPhi is headquartered in Richmond, Va., but has operations in Colworth, U.K., and Sydney, Australia. - John Davis

Zydus Cadila/Pieris: India’s Zydus Cadila is teaming with Germany’s Pieris to develop and commercialize multiple novel protein therapeutics derived from the anticalin protein molecule. In an Oct. 16 announcement, the companies said the partnership would combine Pieris capabilities in drug discovery and early drug development with Zydus’ expertise in regulatory affairs and development and manufacturing of biologics. No financial terms were disclosed, but the companies said in a release that they will share licensing revenues under mutually agreed-upon terms. The collaboration is intended to develop candidates to proof-of-concept and then seek out-licensing in Pieris’ commercial territories. The most advanced program under the partnership is PRS-110, an anticalin protein specific for c-MET, a target that has been validated in a broad spectrum of tumor types. The candidate is a pure antagonist due to monovalent target engagement and in animal models has demonstrated the ability to inhibit ligand-dependent and –independent c-MET activity. - J.A.H.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Deals of the Week Gets Better Connected, Dips A Toe In Digital Health

Digital health is a bit of a catch-all. It encompasses everything from inexpensive exercise- and diet-recording gadgets to sophisticated multimillion dollar disease management systems, online pharmacies and website-based behavioral therapies. Truth be told, this DOTW correspondent, like many pharma execs, has always put the drugs first.

But there's no denying the clamor of expert opinion claiming digital health will be a powerful disrupter of health care markets in the future, potentially transforming pharma and device companies into service providers. "Digital health is going to happen, it may take time and will advance in fits and starts, but it will happen without the help of the establishment," Simon Cook, CEO of VC firm DFJ Esprit, told the London meeting of the Digital Health Forum, DHF13, earlier this month. "Nine out of 10 digital health businesses will fail, but a few will succeed and change the health care system." DFJ has investments in biopharma companies like Kiadis Pharma and Oxford Immunotec, as well as the internet nutritional company, Graze.

The transformation is coming faster now than two or three years ago, Cook said, because of the increasing pressure on individuals to take control of their own health, coupled with the increasing pervasiveness of smart phones and apps, making people comfortable with digital technology.

The investment community also is more engaged. Low-capital intensity business models are starting to emerge for digital health companies and are "incredibly compelling" for venture capitalists, said Alex van Someren, managing partner of seed funds at Amadeus Capital Partners. Amadeus, along with Archimedia Investments, put £1.6 million ($2.4 million) into the health care cloud platform, Qinec, in November 2012, and took part in May 2013 in a £2 million financing round for TrialReach, a company trying to improve patient awareness of clinical trials.

But small investment rounds, which characterize the digital health sector, often slip below the radar, or are not disclosed publicly, leading to a lack of comprehensive information about deal flows and valuations.

In the increasingly hot area of patient engagement and consumer health, much of the attention devoted to digital health has focused on continuous health monitoring followed by instant intervention via 24/7 connectivity. Innovators have focused on the concept for years, progressing slowly, but newcomers say they're at a turning point. U.K-start-up CellNovo, backed by investors and VCs to the tune of more than $40 million, is one of a slew of companies trying to address this challenge, and believes it is the most advanced in the diabetes sector.

Cellnovo has developed algorithms and software which allow physicians to monitor patients remotely in a sophisticated manner not seen with other company's systems. It anticipates a commercial launch of its digitally interconnected blood sugar monitor, insulin patch pump and exercise diary later this year, said Executive Chairman Eric Beard.

The theory that digital tools can improve the quality of care while saving money is exactly what the US and other countries are striving for as they work to reform their health care systems. In that sense, digital health tools are aligned with systemic priorities, and its benefits have not gone unnoticed by pharmaceutical companies as they and others try to grapple with harsh demands. Johnson & Johnson's business unit, Janssen Healthcare Innovation (JHI) is accelerating J&J's change from a product-centric to a health care solutions company. The company has noticed digital health start-ups often struggle to scale-up, and intends to offer master classes to European entrepreneurs in business development, to enhance the digital health ecosystem, in collaboration with partners.

But while we await the detonation of digital disruption, pharma and biotech have continued to forge deals and agreements, as we unveil ...

AstraZeneca/Roche: AstraZeneca and Roche are teaming up in a medicinal chemistry data-sharing collaboration with the aim of accelerating drug discovery. The deal announced June 26 is a sign big pharma may be more willing to work together in the pre-competitive space to improve the pace of drug development than in the past. Under the arrangement,  the two companies will use a technology called matched molecular pair analysis (MMPA) to identify chemical modifications that can be applied to each company's individual compounds to improve metabolism, pharmacokinetics or safety. The aim is to identify potential new drug candidates faster by using their combined databases of experimental results. Roche and AstraZeneca are committed to making the data generated by the program available to the broader research community, and are open to additional drug manufacturers joining the collaboration. The data-sharing will be managed by MedChemica, an expert in MMPA technology. - Jessica Merrill

MorphoSys/Celgene: Germany's MorphoSys has forged a potentially transformative alliance with Celgene, under which the latter receives worldwide rights to MorphoSys' CD38-targeting antibody, MOR202. The product, which is in Phase I/IIa trials in multiple myeloma, is believed to be Celgene's first clinical-stage antibody for the disease, a therapeutic area it dominates. In return for the rights, MorphoSys receives an upfront fee of $92 million, and Celgene will purchase $60 million worth of shares in MorphoSys at a premium of at least 15% to the biotech's closing share price of $37.06 on June 26. MorphoSys also will receive development, regulatory and sales milestones, plus double-digit royalties outside of a co-promotion territory in Europe, the companies announced June 27. The deal gives the partners the financial firepower to speed MOR202 to the market, while potentially broadening its indications beyond multiple myeloma. - John Davis

Aspen/Merck: South Africa's Aspen Pharmacare Holdings, the largest generics drug firm in Africa, continued its geographic, manufacturing and portfolio expansion efforts in a complex deal valued at more than $1 billion with Merck, roughly one week after revealing it hopes to acquire two mature thrombosis drugs and a manufacturing site from GlaxoSmithKline. For approximately $600 million, Aspen will buy a portfolio of 14 drugs from Merck and acquire active pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturing and related sales sites in the Netherlands and the U.S. In the deal, Aspen will get the Boxtel site in the Netherlands as well as part of two other API plants in that country, along with a manufacturing site in Iowa. Sales offices in the Netherlands and Illinois also will be included in the package. News surfaced June 18 that GSK is mulling an offer from Aspen to purchase Arixtra and Fraxiparine, which generated aggregate sales of $670 million in 2012, as well as a manufacturing site in France. - Joseph Haas

Cytokinetics/Astellas: Cytokinetics has signed a two-year research collaboration including rights to its skeletal muscle activator CK-2127107 with Astellas Pharma. The deal, announced June 25, is the second Cytokinetics has signed in two weeks, extending the company's cash runway and providing financial flexibility to carry on with the development of its lead drug tirasemtiv independently. Like '107, tirasemtiv is a skeletal troponin muscle activator, currently being tested in a Phase IIb clinical trial in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; data are expected by the end of the year. The license for '107 to Astellas is for non-neuromuscular disorders. The development plan encompasses potential indications like cachexia and sarcopenia. The deal does not exclude the potential to study other skeletal activator mechanisms that may emerge from the research in neuromuscular indications. Cytokinetics will receive $40 million initially from Astellas, including a $16 million upfront payment and $24 million in R&D reimbursement over the first two years of the collaboration. The biotech stands to receive as much as $450 million in development and commercial milestones, as well as royalties on any drugs emerging from the collaboration. Cytokinetics announced an expanded collaboration with Amgen June 12, under which it received $25 million upfront in exchange for giving Amgen rights to the heart failure candidate omecamtiv in Japan; the two already are partnered in other parts of the world - JM

Seattle Genetics/Bayer/Agensys: Antibody-drug conjugate specialist Seattle Genetics executed its seventh partnership since the start of 2009 around its auristatin-based ADC technology platform on June 25. This time, the Bothell, Wash., biotech will receive $20 million upfront from Bayer for a multi-target oncology collaboration. Seattle Genetics could earn up to $500 million in milestones under the Bayer agreement, as well as royalties on any products reaching the market. Targets were not disclosed. Bayer will be responsible for all R&D costs, plus manufacturing and commercialization. Seattle Genetics, which brought the first ADC to market for oncology with the 2011 U.S. approval of Adcetris (brentuximab vedotin), now has partnerships with five of the 12 big pharma companies, as well as three Japanese pharma and four biotech firms. In a release, VP of Corporate Development Natasha Hernday said Seattle Genetics has 15 ADCs in clinical development between proprietary and partnered programs, and is in line to earn up to $3.5 billion in milestones and royalties from its strategic partnerships. The biotech also announced June 27 it had taken an option under its 2007 collaboration with Astellas-affiliated Agensys. Seattle Genetics will fund 50% of the future development costs of ASG-15ME, a potential ADC therapy for bladder and lung cancer for which an IND has been submitted to FDA. - JAH

ADC Therapeutics/VivaMab: Swiss-based ADC Therapeutics is adding to its preclinical pipeline of around 10 antibody-drug conjugates by licensing a novel internalizing antibody, VM101, from BioAtla LLC's therapeutic division, VivaMab LLC. The antibody conjugated with a cytotoxic warhead has already shown in vivo efficacy against models of intractable hematological cancers, the companies reported June 24. ADC Therapeutics plans to start pre-IND development of the antibody-drug conjugate immediately for the treatment of a hematological cancer, with San Diego-based VivaMab providing development support and receiving undisclosed milestones and royalties. The antibody binds to antigens on the surface of tumor cells, is internalized and then releases the cytotoxic pyrrolobenzodiazepine payload. The Swiss firm say it intends to move multiple drugs into the clinic over the next three years. Upon successful proof of concept, it will seek to license the antibody-drug conjugates to pharmaceutical companies. - JD

Immunocore/Genentech: Genentech has become the first major partner of the privately held UK biotech Immunocore, which is developing a new class of bispecific therapeutic proteins called ImmTACs. The companies have entered into a research collaboration and licensing agreement for the discovery and development of multiple novel cancer agents, with Immunocore receiving an initation fee of $10-20 million for each program, the companies announced June 27. Immunocore will also receive more than $300 million in development and commercial milestones for each target program, and tiered royalties. The company's lead product, IMCgp100, which is in a Phase I/II clinical trial in patients with late-stage melanoma, is  not part of the deal. ImmTACs consist of high-affinity T-cell receptors linked to an antibody fragment, anti-CD3, which activates the immune system. T-cell receptors can recognize intracellular changes tha occur during cancer or viral infections, and ImmTACs are expected to target and destroy cancer cells without affecting healthy cells. - JD

Tesaro/Myriad Genetics: Tesaro, a three-year-old company focusing on cancer and moving at lightning speed, will use Myriad Genetic's BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation tests to screen patients for enrollment in Phase III trials for one of its lead drugs, niraparib. The drug, a PARP inhibitor, which Tesaro in-licensed from Merck in 2012, is geared to patients with BRCA1 & 2 mutations who have breast or ovarian cancers. Myriad is the only company offering an FDA-approved version of this test, so the alternative would be to go to laboratories offering home grown versions, but the latter may not be as robust, a downside for inclusion in pivotal trials. Both studies will be initiated in mid-to-late 2013. Tesaro told Robyn Karnauskas, an analyst with Deutsche Bank, that its PARP inhibitor program is its most de-risked development strategy, based on very specific input from EMA and FDA. Women with germline BRCA 1 or 2 mutations have increased risk of developing high-grade ovarian and breast cancers, which are particularly sensitive to PARP inhibitors. Management further believes that the drug may be effective in other indications. - Wendy Diller

Nicox SA/Immco Diagnostics: Nicox, a French ophthalmics company, has entered into an exclusive agreement with Buffalo, NY-based Immco Diagnostics to promote a proprietary laboratory test targeted at early detection and diagnosis of Sjoegren's syndrome, an autoimmune disease that destroys the ability to produce tears and saliva. Under the terms of the deal, Nicox will detail the test to ophthalmologists in North America, to whom patients with the syndrome often present because dry eye is a symptom. Immco will be responsible for processing the test and all regulatory activites and reimbursement. Nicox will receive a majority of revenues generated from the ophthalmologists and has a nine-month option to exercise ex-U.S. commercial rights to the test as well. The disease destroys the exocrine glands that produce saliva and tears. Current diagnostic techniques for Sjoegren's syndrome are only moderately effective and detect disease only at advanced stages. The new test aims to diagnose the disease at earlier stages, when it is more treatable. Dry eye is a primary symptom of the disease, which is chronic, and the test is aimed at helping early diagnosis and more efficient management of it; rheumatologists are also involved in treatment. The test was approved in the U.S. in 2013, with a commercial launch expected in the second half of the year - WD

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Deals Of The Week Wonders Whether Heated Competition To Buy Ache Laboratorios Will Muddy The Brazilian Waters

Could a bidding war for Brazil’s privately held Ache Laboratorios do for Latin America what Abbott Laboratories’ gargantuan purchase of part of India’s Piramal Healthcare did for biopharma M&A in India?

Call it the “Piramal effect,” if you will. Abbott reset expectations among India’s domestic pharma world with its $3.72 billion purchase in 2010 of Piramal’s branded generics business. Brazil hasn’t yet seen the kind of blockbuster deal that would raise prices across the board; the highest value deal in that market to date is Sanofi’s $662 million buyout of Brazilian generics firm Medley Pharmaceuticals in 2009.

Sanofi got in early – staking its claim before big pharma’s buying spree in emerging markets generated significant deal inflation – but the deal hardly lifted the value of Brazilian companies across the board. That transaction was followed by smaller deals, such as Takeda’s $251.5 million (BRL 500 million) buyout of Brazilian branded generics specialist Multilab Indústria e Comércio de Produtos Farma about one year ago, which also included potential for up to BRL 40 million in earn-outs.

But, now comes word that could blow all previous Brazilian deals out of the water – Abbott and two of its big pharma competitors, Pfizer and Novartis, are preparing a second round of bids to buy Ache, Brazil’s leader in the sale of prescription drugs. The rumored price tag for Ache, fourth overall domestically in drug sales when over-the-counter products are included, ranges between $4 billion and $5 billion, a matter complicated by talk that at least one of three ownership families does not wish to sell. Ache’s public stance is that it is not up for acquisition.

Ache reported net earnings of $270 million for the 12 months ending Sept. 30, 2012. Nonetheless, a source familiar with the company told Deals of the Week that Ache remains an appealing investment for big pharma due to higher gross margins than its domestic competition, high top-line growth and strong relationships with distributors. In an emerging-markets competition where it is difficult to acquire worthy assets without overpaying, the three pharmas are facing a reality that a price tag above $5 billion – about 20 times EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) – may be required just to get a foot in the door.

One pharma executive who asked not to be named told DOTW that his company is so discouraged by prices for assets in the primary emerging markets that it already is looking to next-generation possibilities such as Nigeria and Colombia.

As an article in The Atlantic notes, for overall business climate, Brazil recently has been viewed as the shining jewel of the so-called BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), with an average real gross domestic product growth rate of 4% between 2004 and 2010, including an eye-opening 7.5% in 2010. Add in low unemployment and a fairly industry-friendly regulatory environment, and Brazil perhaps was positioned to join China as the top emerging market for biopharma.

An early 2013 Business Monitor International report states that total pharmaceutical expenditure in Brazil in 2011 was more than $28.7 billion, and that total was expected to grow by 7.6% in local currency terms in 2012 (while declining in U.S. dollar spending due to exchange-rate fluctuations.) However, the biopharma opportunity in Brazil is being diminished by drug rebates, which are increasing both in total numbers and in size.

Meanwhile, GDP declined 0.9% in Brazil last year, combining with a 6% inflation rate to tarnish the South American giant’s emergence. Outside investment hoping to tap Brazil’s huge population, highlighted by a rising consumer class, faces what is known as “the Brazil cost” – a combination of high tariffs, poor infrastructure and red tape that increase the cost of doing business, the Atlantic reported.

But industry interest in tapping the Brazilian market cannot be denied. A review of Elsevier Business Intelligence’s Strategic Transactions database reveals six major equity investments in Brazilian biopharma holdings this decade. Beside last May’s Takeda/Multilab transaction, these include:

• Valeant Pharmaceuticals paying $28 million in May 2010 for Instituto Terapeutico Delta, a private branded generics and OTC company focused largely on dermatology;
• Pfizer anteing $240 million plus performance-based earn-outs to acquire 40% of generics firm Laboratorio Teuto Brasileiro in October 2010;
• Amgen ponying up $215 million in cash for Bergamo, a hospital-focused company with an emphasis on oncology, in April 2011;
• Merck investing an undisclosed amount in February 2012 to create and own a 51% stake in a Brazilian joint venture with Supera Farma Laboratorios, Cristalia Produtos Quimicos Farmaceuticos and Eurofarma Laboratorios; and
• UCB Group paying an undisclosed sum with potential for performance-based earn-outs to acquire 51% of specialty pharma Meizler Biopharma. The May 2012 deal included an option for UCB to buy out the remainder of the company.

While we await the outcome of the multi-company pursuit of Ache – GlaxoSmithKline reportedly dropped out of the bidding a while back – other biopharma deal-making was completed in the past week as we tally up …

AstraZeneca/AlphaCore: Following through on CEO Pascal Soriot’s promise to rebuild the company’s cardiovascular pipeline, AstraZeneca announced its third cardiovascular deal in two weeks. In the latest tie up, announced April 3, AstraZeneca’s biologics unit MedImmune acquired private biotech AlphaCore Pharma for an undisclosed sum. The big pharma gains ACP-501, a recombinant human lecithin-cholesterol acyltransferase (LCAT) enzyme that is believed to play a major role in removing cholesterol from the body and also may increase levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, better known as “good cholesterol.” A Phase I trial testing the drug met its primary safety and tolerability endpoint and also showed that ACP-501 raised HDL cholesterol in patients taking it. The cholesterol space is a high-risk, high-reward area of drug development, given the growing regulatory and commercial hurdles. But Soriot vowed AstraZeneca would embrace risk as a key to unlocking success in the drug-development process during an overview March 21 in which he unveiled his turnaround plan for the company. Cardiovascular disease is one of three core therapeutic areas the company has committed to. In March, the company signed two deals in the field: an option agreement with messenger RNA developer Moderna Therapeutics for up to 40 programs in exchange for $240 million upfront and a research partnership with Sweden’s Karolinska Institute. - Jessica Merrill

Bind Therapeutics/Pfizer: Nanotech company Bind Therapeutics has inked its second deal with a major player this year, signing a collaboration with Pfizer on April 3. Pfizer will pay Bind to combine its Accurins technology with small molecules provided by the big pharma. Pfizer will pay $50 million in upfront and near-term development expenses per molecule and Bind is eligible for $160 million in regulatory and commercial milestones for each product that reaches the market. Bind did not retain any commercialization rights, but will receive tiered royalties on worldwide sales. The company would not reveal the number or kinds of molecules covered by the deal or the therapeutic area of focus, but did say the agreement covers more than one molecule. The Accurins technology has been explored in the areas of oncology, inflammatory diseases like arthritis and cardiovascular indications. In January, Bind announced a similarly sized agreement with Amgen to develop and commercialize kinase inhibitor nanomedicines to treat solid tumors. - Lisa LaMotta

Ra Pharma/Merck: Less than a year after exiting stealth mode, Ra Pharmaceuticals has landed its first partnership, aligning with Merck to help the pharma discover and develop drugs for difficult-to-hit protein targets. Under the agreement announced April 1, Ra will use its proprietary Extreme Diversity platform to find and develop cyclomimetic candidates that can address intracellular protein-protein reactions in multiple undisclosed therapeutic areas. Ra will receive an undisclosed upfront payment and research funding; discovery, development, regulatory and commercialization milestones could bring its full remuneration to $200 million. While the deal stemmed from early conversations between Ra executives and Reid Leonard, head of Merck Research Ventures Fund, it does not include an equity component for the pharma, Ra President and CEO Doug Treco said. It also includes no risk-sharing, such as a co-promotion option down the road. Ra is developing what it terms a new class of drugs, peptide-like molecules offering the diversity and specificity of antibodies along with the attributes of small molecules, such as oral bioavailability. Cyclomimetics, the cyclic polymer drug candidates produced with Ra’s technology, are characterized by their cyclic structure and backbone as well as side-chain modifications that can provide beneficial properties not offered by natural peptides, the company says. It claims that Ra’s platform produces molecules that are highly specific and stable, offering improved cell permeability and potential for increased bioavailability as well as longer half-lives. - Joseph Haas

Astellas/Ambrx: In its latest tie-up with a major pharmaceutical player, Ambrx announced April 5 that it will collaborate with Japanese pharma Astellas Pharma on a series of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) in the oncology setting. Astellas will pay the biotech $15 million upfront, as well as $285 million in potential development, regulatory and sales-based milestones to discover and develop an undisclosed number of molecules that use its site-specific ADC technology. Last June, Ambrx inked a deal with almost identical financials with Merck. While details of the targets the companies intended to focus on were not disclosed, it was revealed that they would focus on areas “beyond oncology.” Ambrx also has tie-ups with Eli Lilly and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Previously it had arrangements with Wyeth, Roche and Merck Serono. ADC technology, which allows drugs to be targeted to a specific site carrying a therapeutic payload, have become a hot space since Seattle Genetics got approval of its ADC lymphoma drug Adcetris (brentuximab vedotin) in August 2011. - L.L.

Agios/Foundation Medicine: Agios Pharmaceuticals and Foundation Medicine signed a pact April 4 to use the latter’s clinical assay, FoundationOne, to create diagnostics which could identify ideal patients for Agios’ compounds aimed at cancer metabolism. No financial terms were disclosed. The diagnostic-discovery collaboration will focus on Agios candidates intended to inhibit tumors that carry mutations in the IDH1 and IDH2 metabolic enzymes. The work will seek to identify tumor genomic alterations that would be most likely to respond to Agios’ candidates, and to potentially develop and commercialize companion diagnostics for Agios compounds. Foundation, which developed the FoundationOne genome analysis profiling system for personalized cancer treatment decision-making, raised a $42.5 million Series B financing in 2012 with a syndicate of venture capital and corporate venture outfits. The round was topped off with an additional $13.5 million this past January from individual investors including Bill Gates, Yuri Millner and new board member Evan Jones. Agios, partnered since 2010 with Celgene on cancer metabolism R&D efforts, raised a $78 million Series C round in 2011 and announced plans to branch out therapeutically into rare genetic disorders. - J.A.H.

Novartis/ImmunoGen: ImmunoGen on April 4 updated the status of its 2010 licensing agreement with Novartis to apply the biotech’s Targeted Antibody Payload (TAP) technology platform to create cancer-fighting antibodies for undisclosed targets chosen by the multinational pharma. Under an amendment to the agreement, Novartis has exclusively licensed one compound against a still-undisclosed target, while taking a non-exclusive license to a second compound which can be converted later to an exclusive license. ImmunoGen will receive $4.5 million upfront under the amendment and could earn between $200 million and $238 million in milestones pegged to the two compounds, plus potential sales royalties. Of the upfront money, $1 million is an option exercise fee, while the remaining $3.5 million, which could be credited against future milestone payments, will be paid if Novartis terminates development of one or both compounds. In a same-day note, Cowen & Company analyst Simos Simeonidis called the developments “an incremental positive for ImmunoGen” that helps to validate the TAP platform. In October 2010, Novartis paid $45 million upfront for the license, intended to help it create antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) therapeutics for cancer. The deal offered the potential for up to $200.5 million in milestones for each target leading to development of an ADC, as well as sales royalties on any products reaching market. - J.A.H.

ArQule/Daiichi Sankyo: In our “No-Deal” of the week, collaborators ArQule and Daiichi Sankyo have decided to terminate an early-stage collaboration around Phase I oncology compound ARQ-092. The news comes just months after a Phase III setback of the companies’ later-stage oncology compound tivantinib, which the two companies will continue developing together. Daiichi opted to license ARQ-092 in November 2011 and paid $10 million upfront at the time, as well as Phase I development expenses. ArQule stood to gain $255 million in milestone payments and the deal included development of multiple compounds; the program now has been returned to the Woburn, Mass.-based company. Meanwhile, tivantinib failed to show overall survival in a late-stage trial in non-small cell lung cancer. The drug’s development focus now has been shifted to liver cancer. The partners signed their initial agreement for tivantinib (known then as ARQ-197) in November 2008. Daiichi agreed to pay $60 million upfront, as well as $560 million in milestones to license the c-Met receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. - L.L.

Photo Credit: Muddy Amazonia

Financings Of The Fortnight: Idenix To Forge Ahead On HCV Combo After Novartis' Departure

Idenix Pharmaceuticals has been quite busy of late, on the fundraising front and elsewhere. A clinical-stage biotech with a market cap of nearly $900 million and no marketed products, the virology-focused firm has just exited a long-term collaboration with Novartis, raised $191 million in a registered direct offering, and previewed preclinical data for a hepatitis C candidate that it says appears to offer greater antiviral activity than any other clinical compound in its class.

Also of note, with IDX184, Idenix owns one of four nucleoside polymerase inhibitors still in clinical development for HCV, and that class widely is seen as the backbone for future combinations of all-oral, direct-acting antivirals that could transform a burgeoning market highlighted by millions of warehoused and potentially tens of millions of undiagnosed patients. The peak annual market for HCV drugs has been estimated as high as $20 billion worldwide, and Idenix, while trailing clear leader Gilead Sciences, is positioned as well or better than many more established and deep-pocketed companies racing to grab a significant chunk of that market.

Notably, Idenix might be in an enviable position compared with big pharma rival Bristol-Myers Squibb, which may have flushed $2.5 billion down the drain in January when it bought Inhibitex and its promising mid-stage “nuc,” INX-189. On Aug. 1, Bristol announced it suspended dosing in a Phase II trial of that compound after one patient in the study suffered heart failure – and many Wall Street analysts subsequently have written off that compound (BMS-986094) as a failure.

Idenix CEO Ron Renaud isn’t declaring victory in the frequently changing HCV space, but it’s hard not to view the Cambridge, Mass., firm as being well-positioned, having just reclaimed full rights to ‘184 as the scarcity of such compounds worsens. After nearly a decade of working together on HCV candidates, Novartis and Idenix agreed to end their collaboration on July 31, a decision that Renaud told “Financings of the Fortnight” was a mutual recognition by both companies that a termination would put Idenix on the best footing to advance its HCV program in terms of both clinical and business development.

“Novartis understood that Idenix needed the flexibility to move forward with our pipeline and to have as many possibilities to combine our assets with other assets at various stages of development that the former agreement that we had with Novartis just would not allow,” he said. “There were too many onerous rights – both corporate governance rights and clinical pipeline rights – that prevented us from having fulsome discussions with potential partners about how to move forward together.” Novartis held an option for ‘184, but declined.

Novartis remains the largest shareholder in Idenix and it still stands to benefit significantly if Idenix is one of the winners in the HCV race, Renaud added. All Idenix owners had their ownership stakes diluted through a registered public offering that placed 23.5 million new shares at $8 apiece, including an over-allotment for offering managers JP Morgan and Leerink Swann. The RPO netted Idenix about $191 million, giving the firm runway through the first quarter of 2014, CFO Daniella Beckman said.

Idenix had $79.1 million cash on hand as of June 30, thanks in part to a pair of follow-on offerings in 2011 that netted a combined $105.4 million. Its shares had been trading in the $10 range in the weeks just prior to the offering’s pricing on Aug. 2, but closed trading on Aug. 8 down 4% to a palindromic $8.08 a share. Beckman and Renaud conceded that dilution always will be an issue for a clinical-stage biotech, but said their priority had to be gathering enough cash to see Idenix through a crucial Phase II trial testing ‘184 in combination with IDX719, the firm’s Phase II NS5A inhibitor for HCV.

“On the heels of our restructured deal with Novartis, we wanted to make sure we got any balance-sheet concerns behind us as well, and we wanted to be able to execute the business plan,” explained Renaud. That plan includes not just the combo study but also bringing a second-generation nuc, IDX368, into clinical development next year, with other nucs to follow. “This is going to take some considerable financial resources as well as human resources, and this capital raise will enable us to do that now,” he said.

Idenix intends to start both the Phase II combination study – expected to be an all-comers trial of about 200 HCV patients who will receive 100 mg of ‘184 once-daily and likely 100 mg of ‘719 once-daily, in a set of treatment groups some of which also will receive ribavirin – and the first Phase I trial for ‘368 before the end of 2012. The latter compound is the product of a project that has yielded 1,900 new compounds over the past 18 months in search of nucs superior to those in clinical development now (at Idenix, Gilead (GS-7977) and Vertex Pharmaceuticals (ALS-2200)).

“Right now, ‘368 appears to generate more triphosphate, which is what actually kills the HCV virus, than any other nuc that we’ve ever seen in clinical development,” Renaud asserted. “We suspect this a drug that we can start dosing at very low doses once a day and it appears at least preclinically to be very combinable with other classes of DAAs.”

And the HCV race goes on, as do other biopharmaceutical companies’ fundraising plans, which we now review in this installment of …

Mersana Therapeutics: A March collaboration with Endo Health Solutions to create next-generation antibody-drug conjugate therapeutics for cancer was a key turning point for Mersana Therapeutics, a new beginning signified by a $27 million recapitalization announced July 31. Under the financing, which Mersana called a Series A-1, the biotech will receive backing from New Enterprise Associates and Pfizer Venture Investments as well as a group of returning investors. Using its Fleximer conjugation technology to bind a wide variety of novel linkers with anti-tumor payloads, Mersana says it can create ADCs offering a wider variety of payloads, the ability to increase drug loading per antibody significantly while maintaining pharmacokinetic and physiochemical properties, and the capability to use antibody fragments as well as full antibodies. NEA’s participation in the round marks the first biopharma investment under its $2.6 billion NEA 14 fund. With its investment, NEA also will bring General Partner David Mott to Mersana as chairman of the board, while NEA principal Sara Nayeem will take a board seat. “NEA brings enormous financing capability plus tremendous intellectual resources,” said Mersana CEO Nicholas Bacopoulos. “Pfizer also adds to this validation.” Existing investors Fidelity Biosciences, ProQuest Investments, Rho Capital Partners and Harris & Harris Group also backed the round. Mersana raised $21 million through its Series A in 2005, augmenting that most recently with two sales of debt totaling $10 million in 2011 and 2012. – Joseph Haas

Hyperion Therapeutics: In the lone biotech IPO of this fortnight, Hyperion Therapeutics netted $53.5 million on July 31 by selling 5.75 million shares (including the 750,000-share overallotment) at $10, falling short of its $11-13 range. Hyperion, which has raised at least $100 million in venture capital, is awaiting an October PDUFA date on its lead compound Ravicti (glycerol phenylbutyrate) for urea cycle disorders (UCD), a group of rare genetic diseases caused by an enzyme or protein transporter deficiency in the urea cycle that leads to elevated ammonia levels in the blood. In March 2012, Hyperion acquired a global license to the drug from Ucyclyd Pharma, after initially receiving only limited rights in 2007. The only other branded FDA-approved therapeutic for UCD is Ucyclyd’s Buphenyl (sodium phenylbutyrate), and Hyperion holds U.S. co-promotion rights to that drug, plus an option on worldwide rights. Hyperion is the fifth rare disease company to go public in the last five years, according to Elsevier’s Strategic Transactions, and it’s the second-highest netting IPO behind MolMed SPA’s $82 million offering in February 2008. (MolMed’s orphan candidates include Phase III Arenegyr (NGR-hTNF alpha), a vascular targeting agent for malignant pleural mesothelioma.) Only two weeks out from its IPO, Hyperion has been trading in the black, closing at $10.35 on Aug. 8. Other rare disease players that have fared well include Aegerion Pharmaceuticals (which tried to go public twice before succeeding in October 2010): the lomitapide developer closed at $13.54 on Aug. 8, 42% higher than its $9.50 IPO price. That, however, was still lower than the bottom-end of its anticipated $14-16 IPO range. Novagali Pharma, which is developing a vernal keratoconjunctivitis candidate and debuted on the NYSE Euronext Paris Exchange in July 2010, went a different route and last year sold 50.55% of the company to Japanese pharma Santen Pharmaceutical, which paid €6.15 per share, almost double Novagali’s IPO price. – Amanda Micklus

Atterocor: Besides ADC developer Mersana’s $27 million Series A-1 recap round, FOTF recently saw another private biotech in the cancer space raise funds: Atterocor completed a $16 million Series A financing backed by Frazier Healthcare Ventures and 5AM Ventures on Aug. 3. (The last time these two syndicated together was for Marcadia Biotech’s $15 million Series A, along with Twilight Venture Partners; Roche later acquired Marcadia for $292 million upfront). Atterocor is developing candidates for one of the most uncommon types of cancer: adrenal gland cancers, which include adrenocortical carcinoma, neuroblastoma and pheochromocytoma. Atterocor’s founder and CEO Julia Owens says the new funding will help move a lead medicine into clinical trials. Not much has been revealed about the company’s work, however scientific advisor Gary Hammer, the director of the endocrine oncology program at the University of Michigan’s Comprehensive Cancer Center, has been focused on the mechanisms of adrenal-specific growth and differentiation via growth-factor signaling and transcriptional programs. He is specifically addressing dysregulated growth of adrenocortical stem/progenitor cells. Atterocor was established earlier this year and previously raised $500,000 in debt financing from a single investor. There are only a handful of competitors developing treatments for adrenal cancers. One of the most advanced is Astellas Pharma/OSI Pharmaceuticals’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor linsitinib, in Phase II for locally advanced or metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma. The European Commission granted orphan drug status to the candidate this past April. – A.M.

Exelixis: Small-molecule cancer therapeutics biotech Exelixis  has completed concurrent financings, which are expected to result in aggregate net proceeds of $361.9 million. For the $127.5 million common stock offering of 30 million shares (up from the 20 million originally proposed) at $4.25, Goldman Sachs and Cowen & Co. are jointly managing with Piper Jaffray, Stifel Nicolaus Weisel and William Blair & Co. co-managing. After the FOPO, the second-largest of its six follow-ons to date, Exelixis’ valuation is up to about $760 million, a steady decrease from the company’s last two FOPOs, first in March 2011 when the valuation was $1.4 billion and then in February 2012 when the market cap dipped down to $815 million. In the second part of the current fundraise and marking its first public debt financing to date, the biotech is offering $250 million worth of seven-year, 4.25% convertible senior subordinated notes (with an option to purchase additional notes up to an aggregate principal amount of $37.5 million). The notes are redeemable at a price of about $5.31 apiece (with a conversion rate of 188.2353 shares per $1,000 principal), which represents about a 13% discount to Exelixis’ 10-day pre-announcement average, yet a 25% premium to the FOPO share price. The company closed at $4.28 on Aug. 8, a 13% decrease from the Aug. 6 closing price. The debt offering is jointly led by Goldman, Sachs and Cowen; co-managers are Citigroup, Credit Suisse Group and Morgan Stanley. Exelixis will put the proceeds toward its extensive pipeline of oncology candidates, many of which are partnered with big pharma including GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Bristol and Roche. In particular it needs the cash to advance its lead candidate cabozantinib (formerly XL184) – a dual inhibitor of MET and VEGF pathways – in Phase III for medullary thyroid cancer, and also in multiple clinical trials for other cancers including castration-resistant prostate, lung and ovarian. In 2008, BMS licensed exclusive worldwide rights to ‘184, paying a hefty $195 million upfront, but in 2010 returned those rights to Exelixis, which went on to develop the candidate on its own. In 2011, cabozantinib gained orphan status in the medullary and other thyroid cancer indications and FDA just granted a priority review, with a decision expected by late November. If accepted, this would be Exelixis’ first approval. – Maureen Riordan

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Financings of the Fortnight: Less Talk, More Rock

Third Rock Ventures has topped itself. One of biotech’s few ready sources of early-stage capital, the firm has announced its backing of three firms in the past week, and all of them one way or another fly in the face of the caution so many life-science VCs move with these days. One of those investments, announced Thursday, June 14, is Third Rock’s largest solo Series A funding to date, which is saying something. This is a firm that has previously flown solo in launching companies such as SAGE Therapeutics ($35 million), Blueprint Medicines ($40 million), Ember Therapeutics ($34 million), and Lotus Tissue Repair ($26 million).

Now it's making a big bet -- no, a huge bet -- of $40.7 million on Global Blood Therapeutics, and our colleagues at "The Pink Sheet" have all the details. The company will seek to develop orally available small-molecule drugs that affect blood disorders; its first target is sickle-cell disease. GBT believes it can use allosteric modulation to overcome the single mutation in hemoglobin that causes the misshapen, sticky clusters of red blood cells, and help patients produce healthy, round ones.

No syndication? No problem. GBT CEO and Third Rock’s newest partner, Mark Goldsmith, says “there are significant advantages [in acting] as a single investor.” A few other VCs will sometimes launch a firm solo with seed or early-A money – check out this profile to read how Avalon Ventures does it – but not with the firepower Third Rock brings to bear. Formed by former Millennium Pharmaceuticals executives, the firm is now investing from its second fund, which closed at $426 million in 2010.

The Third Rock proposition of big bets on ambitious biomedical science hasn't proven itself out with knockout exits. Then again, they've only been at it for five years. And knowing many of their investments will require the patience of life-science saints, they've also built in clearer, perhaps faster, paths to exits in a few cases, such as Sanofi's equity stake and two-way options in Warp Drive Bio; or the LLC structure for antibody platform firm Ablexis that makes license fees and milestone payments more easily distributable to investors.

As we saw this week, Third Rock doesn’t always work alone. The firm re-upped in a $25 million Series B round for Rhythm Pharmaceuticals, which is built around ghrelin and melanocortin agonists for GI and metabolic diseases in-licensed from Ipsen. TRV was part of the $21 million Series A syndicate, but in the B round, Ipsen is taking the lead and building upon the 17% equity stake it acquired as part of the original in-licensing deal. Rhythm is more specialty play than science experiment, but the risk lies in the indication: metabolic disease has proven a thorny field, despite the screaming unmet need, for product development. Recent FDA decisions for two weight-loss drugs have given the field a lift, but overall the climate still seems to favor more regulation, not less.

Our Third Rock edition of FOTF ends with Igenica, a low-profile antibody firm that pulled in a $33 million C round with Third Rock in the lead. It was Third Rock’s first involvement in Igenica, which hasn’t said much until now about its twin oncology discovery platforms: one analyzes the surface proteins of tumor cells and provides data on the relative abundance of antigens; a second uses mouse models not just to screen antibodies against those antigens for affinity, but to measure anti-tumor effect.

More on Igenica below in our roundup, but we’ll end with a FOTF challenge: If Third Rock really wants to be on the cutting edge of biomedical innovation, how about funding some microbiome start-ups? With the wealth of data coming out of this week’s microbiomapalooza, surely there’s a way to put those Third Rock millions to use. We can see the headlines now: “Venture Firm Follows Gut For Latest Launch.”

You’ve got an appetite for bad puns and tasty fundings? Belly up to the latest edition of…

Igenica: Preclinical antibody firm Igenica said June 12 it has raised a $33 million Series C round led by new investor Third Rock Ventures, one of the rare instances of Third Rock waiting a few years and stepping in for a later round. But Igenica is no late-stage investment. The new cash brings total venture fundraising to $55 million, and the goal is to have clinical data in hand from a lead program and an IND filed for another before raising more money, says chief business officer John Celebi. The firm says it is going after drug targets that have not previously been investigated for cancer, using both an antibody discovery platform and a target discovery platform.  The firm has been lying low, rumored to be involved in antibody-drug conjugate development, but to date it has said very little about its programs. Third Rock moved with “such alacrity,” says Celebi, that the final tranche of the firm’s $24 million Series B round was rolled into the C round, which also included previous investors The Column Group, 5AM Ventures, and OrbiMed Advisors , The firm’s executive chairman is David Goeddel, a founding scientist at Genentech and Tularik, and now a partner at The Column Group, and both Celebi and the firm’s VP of research Guoqing Chen are Tularik alumni. – Alex Lash

PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals: PhaseBio announced a $25 million Series B financing in December 2010 to advance its diabetes and cardiovascular drug candidates, but on June 5 the privately held biotech said it had raised an additional $23 million from existing investors. It called this funding a third tranche of its Series B, which brings the round’s total to $48.4 million. “It’s really not our objective to consider another [venture] round,” said CEO Christopher Prior. The money will be used to fund, among other things, a Phase IIb head-to-head trial of lead candidate Glymera, using Novo Nordisk’s Victoza (liraglutide) as a comparator. Glymera is a recombinant GLP-1 analogue for type 2 diabetes. Using an elastin-like biopolymer (ELP) delivery technology acquired from Duke University, PhaseBio seeks to create drug candidates that offer steady-state absorption and longer half-lives than potential competitors. Backers include Johnson & Johnson Development Corp., Astellas Venture Management, New Enterprise Associates, Hatteras Venture Partners and Fletcher Spaght Ventures. The new money also will be put toward a Phase I study of Vasomera for acute and chronic heart failure and pulmonary hypertension, and a Phase I/IIa study of Insumera, a fully mature native insulin formulated to be long-acting with the ELP technology. -- Joseph Haas

Seldar Pharmaceuticals: We wouldn’t be surprised if “Drais” were Japanese for “outsource.” That’s because Drais Pharmaceuticals is quickly becoming the virtual developer of a mini-pipeline of products spun out of Astellas Pharma. Seldar is the name given to the latest outsourcing vehicle under Drais’ auspices, and it works like this: Astellas’s venture arm, along with a familiar syndicate of Sutter Hill Ventures and InterWest Partners, have put $13 million into Seldar to develop a single asset, ASP7147, a bombesin BB2 receptor antagonist to treat irritable bowel syndrome. ASP7147 comes from Astellas, and Drais’ management team will oversee it, with a Phase I trial ready to start soon. It’s another example of a growing comfort with single-asset entities that have short, defined development timelines, all the better to sell or partner without the complicated infrastructure of a full-fledged biotech. It’s also an example of VCs and management sticking to familiar faces who’ve done right by each other in the past: Drais is run by two executives who once ran a US outpost of one of Astellas’ corporate predecessors. Seldar owns all rights to the compound, but Astellas can receive a milestone payment and royalties on future sales. Astellas also has first shot at negotiating partnerships for ASP7147, the right of first refusal for Japan, and the non-exclusive right to negotiate in other regions. The deal follows hard on the heels of a similar arrangement, dubbed Telsar, in which Astellas transferred ownership of an ulcerative colitis treatment to the Drais team and took part in a $14 million Series A round. The Seldar syndicate also invested in Telsar – as well as in Drais, and before that, in AkaRx, which brought its backers a lucrative return in 2009. -- A.L.

BioMarin Pharmaceutical: In its first public offering in five years, orphan disease drug developer BioMarin raised nearly $236 million in a May 31 sale of 6.5 million shares at $36.28, giving the company a post-market cap of $4.4 billion. If underwriters exercise the 650,000-share overallotment, proceeds will be $259 million. The healthy stock valuation appears to be a result of growing investor optimism for BioMarin’s Phase III enzyme replacement therapy GALNS (N-acetylgalactosamine-6 sulfatase) to treat the rare autosomal disorder Morquio A syndrome (MPS IV). GALNS recently topped Leerink Swann’s predictions of the ten most successful near-future product launches. Joe Schwartz, Leerink’s managing director of biotech, believes enzyme replacement therapies are a big opportunity, and he calls GALNS a potential “miniblockbuster." It would be the only therapy for MPS. BioMarin’s financing is the most raised in a follow-on public offering in the past five years among biotechs with $400-500 million in revenues, a crowd that includes Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Myriad Genetics, and The Medicines Co. It was also the second triple-digit offering of the month in the rare disease space, following Alexion Pharmaceuticals and its $462 million sale of 5 million shares that priced at $93.02 each. (Alexion had sales of $783 million in 2011.) Rumors have also circulated this week that GlaxoSmithKline has eyes on BioMarin as a possible acquisition target. – Maureen Riordan

Kick-ass photo courtesy of Lidal-K.

Financings of the Fortnight Hops Around

We’ve got a short attention span this week, what with magazine deadlines, an overnight trip to Seattle to help interview participants at this lively Xconomy event on biotech business models, and preparations for a week of solo parenting.

So we’ll keep our intro brief while doing a bit of globe-hopping: New sources of biotech funding were unveiled this past fortnight on three different continents. In Europe, Cancer Research UK and the European Investment Fund joined forces for the $80 million CRT Pioneer Fund aimed at helping projects -- not companies -- bridge the valley of you-know-what between preclinical work and mid-stage clinical studies. Read more about its unusual asset-centricity here. (Our suggestion: If you must pass through the Valley of Death, do it in the spring after a wet rainy season.) In Asia, the Malaysian government revved up its second biotech fund, this time for $100 million, as our PharmAsia colleagues describe here.

In North America, Merck is getting granular, contributing $35 million to the Merck Lumira Biosciences Fund for early stage companies in Quebec, part of its Canadian division's promise to contribute $100 million to Quebec-based life science R&D after it closed its Montreal lab in 2010. The fund is targeting a $50 million final close and will be managed by Lumira Capital of Montreal.

Then there’s Russia, which spans two continents. Its sovereign nanotech fund Rusnano is looking for cash from sources other than the Russian government to plow into more investments – many of which so far have been US-based biotech companies, as our START-UP colleagues explained in this profile. Investing in Rusnano is akin to investing in Russia, to an extent, because companies that receive direct investments from Rusnano must pledge to establish a footprint in Russia. Rusnano’s top executive in the US, Dmitry Akhanov, told VentureWire this week that Rusnano expects its first exits this year, “which is very important for valuation” as it goes out to fundraise. Rusnano wants to sell 10% of its $10 billion fund by the end of the year, says Akhanov: "The (Russian) government has decided that Rusnano is mature enough to become private and grow without direct government support."

Notice anything in common with all these funds? Exciting vacation destinations, perhaps – Montreal is certainly near the top of FOTF’s list in the summer months – but we were thinking more of who’s putting the money forth. With the exception of the Merck Lumira fund and the small slice of contributions from les VC, these funds are VC-free. They might, like Rusnano, partner with VCs, but the wellspring is located elsewhere. Could just be the way this fortnight rolled forth, but as serial entrepreneur John Mendlein put it at the Xconomy confab this week, it’s all about the cost of capital these days. For many corporations, foundations and sovereign states, cash is easy to come by, and a lot of those eggs are going into the baskets VCs are either unwilling or unable to fill. And with that, it's time to crack open another edition of...

Merrimack Pharmaceuticals: The cancer therapeutics firm raised $100 million in its initial public offering, selling 14.3 million shares at $7 a piece on Wednesday, March 28. The 20-year-old firm which began under the name Immtek was queued up to go public in January with loftier ambitions – 16.7 million shares in the $8 to $10 range – but postponed due to the ever-present “market conditions.” (Never mind that in the same fortnight, three other biotechs went public.) One big difference between Merrimack and its more successful peers at the time was insider participation; the other three, Cempra Pharmaceuticals, Chemocentryx and Verastem, had it, and Merrimack did not. (At least, it didn’t report it in its SEC filings.) Having previous investors cross over and take shares in the IPO is one of the inducements IPO buyers look for, as we reported in this START-UP story. (For those without a subscription, a shorter version is here.) Lo and behold, Merrimack’s filings this time around show that at least one existing investor (and its largest), Fidelity Investments, lined up to buy nearly $29 million of the offering. Fidelity was the largest purchaser of Merrimack’s most recent private fundraising, the $77 million Series G round (yes, G) it sold in April 2011. The round brought the company’s total private financing to $270 million. Its lead compound MM-398, a reformulated version of the chemotherapy irinotecan, is in Phase III to treat patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who have failed gemcitabine. It has orphan drug designation in the US and EU. JPMorgan led the underwriting team with help from BofA Merrill Lynch, Cowen and Co. and Oppenheimer & Co. Underwriters have 30 days from the IPO date to buy up to 2.1 million additional shares. Merrimack shares closed at $6.01, down 14% from their IPO price, on April 4. -- Alex Lash

Promethera Biosciences: Belgian cell therapy company Promethera is the latest to join the crowd developing medicines for rare diseases. Promethera has raised $31.4 million in a Series B round, the largest venture financing this year in Europe, to support the start of clinical trials of its progenitor hepatocyte product, Promethera HepaStem, for orphan liver diseases like Crigler-Najjar syndrome, urea cycle disorder and phenylketonuria. Industry interest in its technology is evident from the presence among the new investors of two corporate VC funds, Shire and Boehringer Ingelheim. Japanese firm Mitsui Global Investment and US culture systems company ATMI Life Sciences also have re-upped for the B round. Shire has had a focus on regenerative medicines ever since it bought Advanced BioHealing in May 2011, and Boehringer Ingelheim is already a leading contract manufacturer of biopharmaceuticals using cell culture systems. Promethera's progenitor cells are isolated and cultured from one liver using its proprietary methods, and are expected to treat more than 100 patients without inducing rejection. Although cell therapy companies have disappointed in the past, the sector is starting to show greater promise, with better understanding and controls over cell culture and manufacture. Belgian and UK regulators already have cleared Promethera to begin Phase I/II studies of its hepatocyte product. -- John Davis

ADC Therapeutics: The new Swiss company is less an independent entity and more an extension of Spirogen, a UK developer of cytotoxic small molecules called pyrrolobenzodiazepines (PBDs) to be used in antibody-drug conjugate cancer drugs. Both are portfolio companies of Celtic Therapeutics Holdings, a private equity firm with a complicated past. Celtic has pledged up to $50 million to ADC Therapeutics, which will take the cytotoxins and linker chemistry from Spirogen and try to marry them with antibodies licensed from third parties to create ADCs that could treat several types of cancers. ADC hopes to have its first two candidates in the clinic within 18 months. It will develop the drugs only to Phase II proof of concept, then look for larger partners to help with expensive late-stage development and commercialization. Celtic general partners Peter Corr and Stephen Evans-Freke will sit on ADC Therapeutics’ board, along with the new company’s CEO Michael Forer, Spirogen CEO Christopher Martin, former National Cancer Institute Director Samuel Broder and Barrie Ward, the former CEO of KuDOS Pharmaceuticals. Forer also is a partner in Spirogen. Celtic currently is looking for a director of R&D for ADC Therapeutics, to be based at the London headquarters of Spirogen and travel between the two companies. The $50 million investment will be given to the company as needed for drug development over the next three to five years. -- Lisa LaMotta

Enterome Bioscience: The French firm said March 22 it has raised a 5 million Series A round led by Lundbeckfond Ventures and Seventure Partners. It is one of several companies exploring the human microbiome – the gene pool of the bacteria living within our bodies, particularly in our intestines. Enterome is developing biomarkers to measure abnormalities in the bacterial mix of the intestine, with the goal of eventually developing therapeutics to treat bowel and metabolic diseases mediated by the gut microbiota, such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, obesity and type-2 diabetes. Enterome says changes in the bacterial composition that could signal disease include alterations in gut permeability that lead to insulin resistance, low-grade inflammation and metabolic endotoxemia (an increase in the level of bacterial lipopolysaccharides in the blood, often from a sustained high-fat diet). Founders include former executives at Fovea Pharmaceuticals, which was acquired by Sanofi in 2009. Enterome isn’t the only start-up betting that technological advances will release insights into the microbial universe and lead to drugs. Northern California firm Second Genome raised $5 million in 2011 to develop its discovery platform based on the PhyloChip, which analyzes the entire 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequence present in every bacterial genome to measure the relative abundance of the thousands of forms of bacteria in nature.  -- A.L.

RIP Haley. Photo courtesy of flickrer Valeehill through a Creative Commons license.