Deals Of The Week: UCSF Catalyzes R&D Tech-Transfer Deals With Private Sector

Neither MedImmune, the biologics arm of AstraZeneca, nor the University of California, San Francisco, is a stranger to R&D collaboration between private industry and academia, but the agreement they signed on Feb. 11 is somewhat unique in that it will take advantage of a UCSF program that was intended to provide external expertise that might help to move basic research into more advanced stages.

At UCSF’s Clinical and Translational Science Institute, the Catalyst Awards program benefits from the input of industry and academic advisors who review burgeoning science and help select which projects should advance further and be given increased resources. CTSI oversees UCSF researchers working on therapeutics, devices, diagnostics and digital health applications, explained June Lee, director of early translational research at CTSI.

The Catalyst program started with about 120 advisors, and now has about 140 and is growing in numbers. “These folks are from all different disciplines, mostly from industry, and represent various different sectors and areas of expertise for product development in the life sciences,” Lee said. According to her, it’s more of a happy coincidence than a plan that the Catalyst Awards program spurred a broad-based partnership – considering both small- and large-molecule projects in cardiovascular and metabolic disease, oncology, respiratory, inflammation and autoimmune disorders, neuroscience and infectious disease – with MedImmune.

The collaboration could end up bringing early-stage assets to MedImmune (or AstraZeneca) in any of those areas, Lee added, since UCSF has 2,400 faculty, of whom about 1,300 are doing research primarily. “Our people are working in all areas of research, and that’s not accounting for post-docs or graduate students,” she said.

“Our primary goal was to enable and support of early-stage technology projects at UCSF,” she said. “For things that have product potential, we bring in the necessary expertise to help the faculty move projects along. Even though spurring deal-making may not have been our primary purpose, the program really is a very appropriate portal for people on the outside to look through to determine which university technologies are most ready to be licensed out.”

Terms have not been disclosed for the MedImmune/UCSF tie-up but Senior VP and Head of the Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmune Innovative Medicines Unit (iMED) Bing Yao said that unlike the Johns Hopkins and University of Maryland, Baltimore arrangements signed last year, which feature an overall R&D funding allocation, funding for this partnership will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

“Some of the programs, we will want to bring to the next stage – they could be preclinical or [we could want to move them] further into clinical development,” Yao noted. “This way, we can give a lot of input. As a company developing products for multiple therapeutic areas, we can bring our expertise to facilitate [the projects] but each program will be unique.”

The agreement extends for three years, with an option to extend it. MedImmune and AstraZeneca personnel will join with the Catalyst Awards advisors and UCSF staff to determine which products move forward with MedImmune/AstraZeneca backing. And the company will have exclusive options rights to the programs it backs, Yao said.

In the six months, Gaithersburg, Md.-based MedImmune has shored up its local base by signing a five-year, $6.5 million, broad-based R&D partnership with Johns Hopkins University in December and a five-year, $6 million pact with University of Maryland, Baltimore in September. It also has R&D relationships with academia in the U.K. and, now, with the UCSF partnership, gets better access to technological advances stemming from the biotechnology hub in the San Francisco bay area, Yao told Deals of the Week.

UCSF, meanwhile, is one of five founding members of the Academic Drug Discovery Consortium, founded in 2012 to serve as a clearinghouse for both academia and industry on research underway within U.S. and international drug research programs. Since 2010, UCSF has negotiated research collaborations with Genentech, Pfizer, Sanofi and Bayer, while licensing a preclinical antibody for organ failure to Stromedix and genetic encoding intellectual property for Parkinson’s disease to uniQure.

While that agreement was signed, other M&A and licensing activity was heating up the cold and snowy winter. Read on for the rest of ....

Mallinckrodt/Cadence: Mallinckrodt will have a lot of work to do to make good on the $1.3 billion it’s paying for Cadence Pharmaceuticals, a price more than 10 times the projected 2013 sales for Cadence’s sole product, Ofirmev (intravenous acetaminophen). Mallinckrodt says the acquisition gives it a third therapeutics platform, in the hospital setting, in addition to its existing focus on generic drugs and pain medications. The specialty drug company plans to keep Cadence’s sales and marketing capabilities and acquire additional hospital products to sell through them. Mallinckrodt announced the acquisition Feb. 11, its first major transaction since it was spun-out from medical device and supply company Covidien in July. Ofirmev launched in January 2011 and is approved to treat mild-to-moderate pain, for the management of moderate-to-severe pain with adjunctive opioid analgesics, and for the reduction of fever. It has expected net product revenues of $110.5 million for 2013. That’s more than twice the $50.1 million posted in 2012, its first full year of sales. As of Sept. 30, Cadence shareholders included Fidelity Management (7.6 million shares), T. Rowe Price Associates (7.2 million), Capital Research (7.1 million), Wellington Management (6 million), The Vanguard Group (3.4 million), NEA (2.1 million) and BlackRock (1.9 million). Mallinckrodt will pay $14 per share for Cadence, a 32% premium to the trailing 30-trading-day volume weighted average price; in 2006, the company completed an IPO at $9 per share with a valuation of about $250 million. That gives shareholders who bought and held IPO shares a roughly 1.5x return. - Stacy Lawrence and Jessica Merrill

Pierre Fabre/Aurigene: Pierre Fabre Group, the French pharmaceuticals and cosmetics firm whose sales are split almost equally between drugs and skincare cosmetics, has acquired worldwide development and commercialization rights (excluding India) to a novel immune checkpoint modulator, AUNP-12, from the Indian drug-discovery firm Aurigene Discovery Technologies. AUNP-12 is the only peptide under development as a PD-1 immune modulator, the companies say. The candidate could be associated with greater efficacy and fewer side effects when used as part of combination therapies, they announced Feb. 12. The peptide achieves effective levels in vivo after subcutaneous dosing, and has inhibited tumor growth and metastasis in preclinical models of cancer. Aurigene, the Bangalore-based biotech that has collaborated with six of the top 10 pharmaceutical companies since its inception in 2002, will receive an undisclosed upfront payment from Pierre Fabre, and milestone payments based on development, regulatory and commercial progress. The deal terms are in line with others in this space, the companies said. It’s also the first major deal the French company has signed since the death of its founder, Pierre Fabre, in the middle of last year. Pierre Fabre specializes in the development of anti-cancer drugs, either alone or with partners; with marketed drugs that include Javlor (vinflunine) and Navelbine (vinorelbine), while Aurigene is a profitable Indian biotech that generates lead compounds and progresses them to preclinical development in concert with collaborators, particularly in oncology and inflammation. - John Davis

Retrophin/Manchester: Retrophin, which netted $37.4 million in an initial public offering in January, has arranged to purchase privately held Manchester Pharmaceuticals for $62.5 million, including $29.5 million upfront. Announced Feb. 12, the transaction is expected to close on March 1, Retrophin said. Like Retrophin, Manchester focuses on rare diseases. The Ft. Collins, Colo.-based firm has two FDA-approved drugs in its portfolio – Chenodal (chenodeoxycholic acid), which is indicated for patients suffering from gallstones in whom surgery poses an unacceptable health risk due to disease or advanced age, and Vecamyl (mecamylamine HCI tablets), indicated for the management of moderately severe to severe essential hypertension and uncomplicated cases of malignant hypertension. Retrophin said it also will seek quick FDA approval for Chenodal, the only FDA-approved chenodeoxycholic acid, for cerebrotendinous xanthomatosis (CTX), a rare metabolic disorder that can cause severe intellectual disability or even prove fatal in young patients. The New York firm also guided that it anticipates revenue of between $10 million and $12 million this year overall, and $19 million to $21 million in 2015. - Joseph Haas

Debiopharm/Affinium: Swiss biopharma Debiopharm Group broadened its antibiotic portfolio by acquiring key assets from Toronto-based Affinium Pharmaceuticals on Feb. 11. The deal includes two narrow-spectrum anti-bacterial candidates, the Phase IIa FabI inhibitor AFN-1252 and its Phase I prodrug, AFN-1720. Debiopharm also acquired Affinium’s technology platform with which it created the two drugs. Terms of the arrangement weren’t disclosed. Affinium says its drugs represent a new class of antibiotics that inhibit the type-II fatty acid synthesis pathway, known as FAS-II, essential for bacterial growth. Its compounds have shown promise in combating staphylococcus infections, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-intermedia Staphylococcus aureus infections, while allowing intravenous-to-oral switching for patients leaving hospital care. Debiopharm expects to develop a companion diagnostic to select appropriate patients as AFN-1720 progresses through the clinic. Debiopharm entered the anti-bacterial field last fall, when it struck a deal with India’s TCG Life Sciences to develop new antibiotics. The company is aiming to develop drugs that preserve existing gut flora while overcoming resistance to broad-spectrum drugs. Affinium raised $33 million in two rounds of funding in 2007 and 2011, from investors including SV Life Sciences, Genesys Capital Partners, Forward Ventures, Oxford Bioscience Partners and Ontario Emerging Technologies Fund.  - Paul Bonanos

Aveo/Astellas: In our “No-Deal of the Week,” Aveo Pharmaceuticals and Astellas announced Feb. 14 that they have terminated a partnership around renal cell carcinoma candidate tivozanib. The Japanese pharma paid $125 million upfront, with $50 million pegged to cover Aveo’s R&D expenses, in 2011 for worldwide rights, except for Asia, to develop, manufacture and market the compound, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of all vascular endothelial growth factor receptors. An NDA was filed in November 2012, but an FDA “complete response” letter and unenthusiastic reception at an advisory committee left the companies not expecting approval in advanced RCC. They terminated the trial program for that indication and decided to re-focus on developing tivozanib for breast and colorectal cancers. Now, Astellas has decided to exit the collaboration for what it calls “strategic” reasons, and the two companies are terminating a Phase II program studying the compound in CRC. All rights to tivozanib will return to Aveo as of Aug. 11. - J.A.H.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Deals Of The Week: New Academia/Industry Partnership Template In Eisai/JHU Collaboration?

As founder and president of a coalition working to enhance academic drug-discovery and collaborations between academia and industry, Barbara Slusher has a good idea of the advantages and pitfalls of such arrangements. She points to ongoing work between Japan’s Eisai and Johns Hopkins University, where she serves as director of neurotranslational drug discovery at the medical school’s Brain Science Institute, as a potentially more mutually rewarding template for academic/industry tie-ups.

In October 2011, Eisai signed a five-year drug-discovery alliance with JHU, initially slated to focus on central nervous system targets. Slusher, who heads up the Academic Drug Discovery Consortium (ADDC) in addition to her responsibilities at JHU, said the partners are about 18 months into a partnership currently focused on two targets, one undisclosed. The other is aimed at identifying drug-like molecules that inhibit xCT, a glutamate cysteine exchanger that Eisai believes could offer potential in combating inflammatory disease.

Barbara Slusher, JHU Brain Science Institute
and Academic Drug Discovery Consortium

Under this alliance, written to last the greater of five years or to the completion or termination of all related projects, the Brain Science Institute reviews target research throughout JHU’s roster of researchers and presents potentially novel and interesting targets for Eisai’s review. Eisai then selects the targets of greatest interest for the high-throughput screening collaboration.

The compound libraries generally available to academic researchers are not as large, diverse or drug-like as those found within a biopharmaceutical company’s library, developed through years of wide-ranging R&D work, Slusher said. Slusher came to JHU in 2010 after working in drug discovery at five biopharma companies, including Eisai, and set a goal of establishing collaborations offering greater potential for academic discovery work.

“One of the things that my team did when we first came to Hopkins was try to establish a relationship with a pharma company such that if any targets we identified were of interest to the company, we would develop a high-throughput screening assay, share that with the company, and they would screen using our assay and compound library,” she said.

“At the point that they find hits, they then transfer those back to my team here and we do all the drug discovery and chemistry to identify a compound to get to the clinic,” Slusher added. “At that point, Eisai has first rights to license that compound.”

“The exciting thing about this collaboration is that it is truly a win/win,” she continued. “From my perspective, academia is excellent at identifying new targets of therapeutic interest, but our screening ability is limited due to the size and quality of the compound libraries available. Our collaboration with Eisai gives us access to a real pharma library. From the Eisai side, the collaboration provides access to new targets and novel therapeutic approaches.”

Lynn Kramer, Eisai’s chief clinical officer and president of its Neuroscience and General Medicine Product Creation Unit (PCU), concurs, saying the JHU tie-up and a similar partnership with University College London, offer Eisai “a novel target identification program that incorporates early drug development.”

“For us, it expands the novelty of our programs and it’s designed to utilize the best skills from each of the two partners to facilitate drug development and pass the compounds back and forth between our strengths and their strengths,” he said. The Brain Science Institute is a little unique from an academic perspective in that it has a number of people who have a lot of drug-development experience in pharmacokinetics, medicinal chemistry, toxicology and animal models,” skills that increasingly are available in top academic medical centers as they try to move up the research value chain.

Lynn Kramer, Eisai

Slusher’s team sorts through the most-promising research from a consolidated team of about 550 researchers to find target prospects for Eisai. His company therefore has access to the most concentrated group of neuroscience researchers outside of Boston, but with a single point of contact and first rights to option programs, Kramer said. JHU advances the programs selected by Eisai as far as the IND-ready stage, with pre-arranged terms for licensing fees, milestones and royalties on those assets it takes in-house.

“Eisai has the ability at multiple stages to come in and acquire the project,” Slusher said. “Depending upon when they in-license, the value derived by the university varies. If Eisai in-licenses the drugs early in the process, Johns Hopkins derives less value than if they in-license late in the process. It’s correlative to the amount of effort we’ve put in.”

About 18 months into the collaboration, JHU has developed assays for the two targets, Eisai has conducted high-throughput screening and is now sending first hits back the university for the next stages of work. “We probably have a year or two of chemistry and drug discovery to do before leads will be identified as options for the company,” Slusher noted. “This whole process probably likely will take three to five years.”

Kramer would not specify Eisai’s internal goals for producing a first clinical candidate from the partnership, other than to say “our goal is in the not-too-distant future – by that I don’t mean in a year. This takes a while.”

In general, Kramer thinks further collaboration with academia will be beneficial for his company. ADDC, founded in 2012, intends to serve as a clearinghouse for both academia and industry on research taking place within U.S. and international drug research programs. It doesn’t do tech-transfer work itself, but aims to make it easier for academics and biopharmaceutical companies to work together.

“You see from our two associations that they’re very flexible,” Kramer said. “We have gotten away from a lot of the intellectual property issues that used to plague the industry, because we’re really interested in molecule IP, not target IP, which used to lead to years of back and forth and impaired academic development. By getting over that hurdle, I view the academic groups as our ‘bread-and-butter’ for novel targets. It’s very hard in the industry to develop a novel, previously unidentified target – it’s too expensive and takes too long.”

It wasn’t just the academic world that biopharma companies were dealing with this past week, though. Read on for …

Teva/NuPathe: Teva expects to launch the migraine patch Zecuity (sumatriptan iontrophoretic transdermal system) in the first half of 2014 after acquiring the developer, NuPathe. The two announced the acquisition plans Jan. 21, with Teva’s $3.65 per share offer, approximately $144 million upfront, trumping rival bidder Endo’s proposal of $3.15 per share. Teva, which needs near-term revenue generators, gains a new product to add to its specialty central nervous system portfolio. FDA already approved the drug in January 2013, but NuPathe held out on commercializing it in order to find a partner. The drug is the only patch approved for migraine. The Israeli pharma’s offer represents a significant 58% premium over the $2.30 NuPathe shares closed at on Dec. 13, the last business day before Endo announced its intentions to buy the company. But it doesn’t offer much financial reward for longer-term investors. NuPathe’s stock opened at $3.80 about a year ago, on Jan. 18, the day after Zecuity was approved by FDA. NuPathe investors could receive additional payments, however, of up to $3.15 per share based on the future sales performance of Zecuity. Investors will receive $2.15 per share if net sales of the product are at least $100 million in any four consecutive calendar quarters on or prior to the ninth anniversary launch date. Another $1.00 per share in cash is payable if sales are at least $300 million in any four calendar quarters over the same time period. - Jessica Merrill

Par Pharmaceuticals/JHP Pharmaceuticals: Par Pharmaceutical is looking to expand the types of generic drugs it can offer beyond the solid, oral-dose pills it has been producing for years. The Woodcliff Lakes, N.J.-based company announced Jan. 21 that is has entered into an agreement to acquire privately held JHP Pharmaceuticals for $490 million in cash, a 2.5x return on investment for JHP’s main investor, private equity firm Warburg Pincus. Par has arranged for $505 million in debt financing to cover the deal and related costs. JHP and all of its assets, including a sterile manufacturing facility in Rochester, MI, will become a wholly owned subsidiary once the deal closes later this quarter. JHP was launched in 2007 when it acquired biologics contract manufacturing assets acquired from King Pharmaceuticals (now part of Pfizer) for $92 million. JHP performs contract manufacturing services worldwide for pharma and biotech customers, producing sterile injectables that require liquid, lyophilized and suspension formulations. The King deal also included branded hospital and acute-care drugs that JHP distributes. The main appeal of JHP to Par is the 14 specialty injectables that it already has on the market, as well as 30 additional candidates it has in its pipeline. Par is looking to expand into high-barrier-to-entry injectable generics as some of the major players in that space falter due to manufacturing problems. - Lisa LaMotta

Biocon/Advaxis: India’s Biocon and New Jersey biotech Advaxis announced an exclusive licensing pact Jan. 22 for co-development and commercialization of ADXS-HPV, a novel cancer immunotherapy for treatment of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cervical cancer in women. The deal covers India and key Asian emerging markets and gives Biocon access to Advaxis’ innovative and proprietary technology for the development of other novel therapeutics. Advaxis recently completed Phase II clinical trials in patients with recurrent cervical cancer in India, and the immunotherapy also is being evaluated in three clinical trials for HPV-associated cancer like recurrent advanced cervical cancer, head and neck cancer, and anal cancer. A spokesperson for Advaxis said the company will receive double-digit royalties on all sales of its immunotherapy product. The biotech will have exclusive rights to supply ADXS-HPV to Biocon, and Biocon will be required to purchase its requirements of ADXS-HPV exclusively from Advaxis at the specified contract price, which may be adjusted periodically. In addition, Advaxis will be entitled to a “six-figure” milestone payment if net sales of ADXS-HPV for the contract year following the initiation of clinical trials in India exceed certain specified thresholds. - Vikas Dandekar

McKesson/Celesio: In a “No Deal” that has turned into a deal, 10 days after saying its proposed acquisition of German drug wholesaler Celesio had fallen through, U.S. drug wholesaler McKesson has reached agreements that will allow it to complete the purchase after all. McKesson launched its bid to greatly expand its global reach through Celesio in October 2013. However, on Jan. 13 it announced that the deal could not be completed due to its failure to acquire 75% of outstanding Celesio shares through a tender offer. Then, in a Jan. 23 release, McKesson said it had reached an agreement with Franz Haniel & Cie. GmbH to acquire its entire holding of Celesio shares at €23.50 per share and another agreement with an affiliate of Elliott Management to acquire Celesio convertible bonds, which will be enough to give McKesson more than 75% ownership of Celesio on a fully diluted basis. The transactions are expected to close within 10 business days. McKesson plans to launch a voluntary tender offer to purchase shares from the remaining minority shareholders shortly after the close of the other transactions. The company said it will consolidate the financial results of Celesio during its fiscal fourth quarter ending March 31, and McKesson’s earnings will reflect its proportionate share of Celesio’s earnings. It expects to realize annual synergies of between $275 million to $325 million four years after the close of the deal. - Scott Steinke



Photo credits: Johns Hopkins University, Eisai Co. Ltd.

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

Financings of the Fortnight Isn’t Convinced You Have Nice Assets

Skeptical kitten wants to see what comes out the other side.

Single-asset companies. Asset-centric funds. Project-based financing. Call it what you will, but with the biopharma news flow these days, you’d think the entire industry was restructuring itself to find, develop and sell single products. You’d think FIPCO dreams were exhibiting some serious unmet medical need.

Building the next Genentech, Amgen or Biogen Idec might not be a popular goal among biotech investors, but as START-UP's third annual life science VC survey is about to reveal, a sizable and growing minority of those investors aren’t interested in the asset-centric model. As the graphic below shows, the skeptics’ numbers (presented as a percentage of total biopharma-investor survey takers) keep inching up year by year.

Well then. Respondents left a lot of comments, too. Here are a few:

“Selectively appealing. Need[s] more human capital.”

“A fad.”

“This strategy requires additional caution.”

And this stem-winder:

“Not a sustainable model for more than a few specialized outfits; the asset scope is limited to anything between optimized leads up to Phase II POC - this is where, in most indications, Pharma can play as well. Again, it requires a specialized group that can identify ideas earlier [and] better than pharma groups and can execute better [and] faster. VC partnerships are in many cases not the right resource for this. [I] still believe this movement is primarily driven by a need to show LPs a new model now that returns on the old model have shown to be 'not so good.’”

Now that’s something to chew on. Because it’s becoming apparent that it’s exactly that combination – VC partnerships with Pharma – driving the model. Avalon Ventures will share the risk for some of its latest fund with GlaxoSmithKline, which is tapping Avalon to scout for assets in the San Diego area and holding options to buy those assets when they reach the cusp of IND-enabling studies. Index Ventures has raised its first life-science-only fund, with an asset-centric bent, with GSK and Johnson & Johnson as limited partners. (Neither will hold options, they say.)

And we’re now seeing the first products emerging from a new fund raised by TVM Capital, which hadn’t raised a fund since 2005. The new $150 million fund is also life sciences only – after 30 years, TVM will no longer actively invest in information technology – and could top out at $200 million by year’s end. Two thirds of it is dedicated not to building companies but to developing pharmaceutical compounds through proof of concept. And some of those assets will be tied to a buyer with an option at Phase II proof of concept. That buyer is Eli Lilly, which is seeing progress three years after announcing its intent to fund three VCs to run a “mirror” portfolio of single-asset companies, but not before some ups and downs.

TVM’s new fund is part of what Lilly used to call the mirror portfolio, now renamed the rather stodgy Capital Funds Portfolio. It’s one of two VCs involved – the other is HealthCare Ventures, which has formed five single asset companies (or, in Lilly-speak, project focused companies, or PFCs).

So there are various riffs on the basic asset-centric tune, but the only constant is the outcome: there isn’t any. That is to say, none of the larger-scale efforts we’ve seen so far have produced exits. Perhaps one or two now and again – such as Index Ventures’ sale of PanGenetics BV to Abbott Laboratories in 2009 -- but we're still waiting to see it pay off as a broader strategy.

We asked our survey takers a few other questions about asset financing: Are there plenty of good assets available to license? Is there enough development expertise to hire? Are LPs and Big Pharma interested in funding the model? Those answers should prove interesting – and they’ll be available in the upcoming issue of START-UP, as will a lot more detail about the TVM-Lilly tie-up. But until then, perhaps this investor comment is the best way to sum up asset financing, in all its various flavors: “They all need to show they work. Call me in a few years.”

That’s no skeptic talking. That’s Hubert Birner, the general partner at TVM leading the life science team, when START-UP asked him which model so far is working. With several efforts well under way, it shouldn’t take more than a few years to judge the early returns.

Speaking of early, your columnist needs to get up before the sun, and the night is growing late. So we’ll get our assets in gear and leave you with the rest of the current edition of…

iPierian/True North Therapeutics: Alzheimer’s hopeful iPierian said September 4 it has pulled in a $30 million Series C round, with part of that cash earmarked for a new company to house one of iPierian’s preclinical compounds. Both iPierian and the newco, True North, will move forward as developers of single assets, which puts iPierian’s discovery platform on the backburner. Formed from the 2009 merger of two companies that benefited from California’s public stem-cell initiative, iPierian aimed to use induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells as the basis for drug discovery. Its current lead candidate, IPN007, has been tested in in vitro combinations of brain cells derived from iPS cells. It targets extracellular tau, a fragmented form of a protein closely associated with Alzheimer’s disease. It’s not yet clear whether iPierian will pursue approval in Alzheimer’s or a related tauopathy such as progressive supranuclear palsy or frontotemporal dementia, but CEO Nancy Stagliano told “The Pink Sheet” the company plans to file an IND in 2014. True North, bankrolled with an undisclosed amount of iPierian’s new venture round, will follow iPierian into the clinic with a compound that targets disorders of the classical complement system, a cascade that functions as part of the innate immune system. SR One, the investment arm of GSK, co-led the round with Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, MPM Capital and all of iPierian’s other existing investors. iPierian’s original investors -- Kleiner Perkins, Highland Capital, MPM and FinTech -- helped establish the company with a $31.5 million Series A round announced in July 2009. Google Ventures led a Series B installment in July 2010, then SROne and Biogen Idec New Ventures topped off the round at $28 million in September 2010. – Paul Bonanos

Evotec: The German drug discovery services company has raised €30 million ($40 million) from the Biotechnology Value Fund and other affiliates of San Francisco investment firm BVF Partners, diversifying its investor base and bringing in extra funds to expand its program of collaborations with academia and biotech companies. BVF bought 11.8 million new shares in Evotec at €2.55 per share, a 3% discount to the closing price August 27, the companies announced August 31. At the same time, BVF bought an option to acquire 11.8 million Evotec shares from TVM Capital at €4 per share over the next 30 months. If exercised, BVF would be the largest single shareholder, with more than an 18% stake in Evotec. The Hamburg-based firm has turned its business around since it restructured in 2009, dropping costly work on its own product pipeline in favour of securing drug discovery alliances and helping pharma and biotech companies to find and optimize new compounds. It has long-term alliances with Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Genentech, Janssen, MedImmune and Ono Pharmaceutical. This year, the company has entered into a collaboration with Harvard University to identify new antibacterials, and with Dana Farber's Belfer Institute for Applied Cancer Science, to explore epigenetic oncology targets. – John Davis

ObsEva: Announced August 29 and detailed in "The Pink Sheet" DAILY, the Swiss start-up has raised a CHF 32 million ($34.9 million) Series A round of funding to develop women’s health drug candidates obtained from Merck Serono. It’s the latest in a series of asset spinouts from Merck Serono, which has cut research staff since Merck KGAA bought Serono in 2006, but its venture group MS Ventures has dedicated funds to help launch those spinouts. (Our IN VIVO colleagues have a detailed look at Merck Serono’s post-merger blues here.) Paris-based Sofinnova Partners led the round, while Sofinnova Ventures of Menlo Park, Calif., and Novo A/S of Denmark participated. MS Ventures took an equity stake as part of the licensing deal that gave ObsEva its first drug candidates. ObsEva CEO, serial entrepreneur and women’s health specialist Ernest Loumaye co-founded the firm roughly two years after selling reproductive medicine company PregLem to Gedeon Richter for CHF 150 million up-front plus milestones. Some clinical work already has been performed on at least one candidate, a Phase II program for pre-term labor that can either reduce or prevent uterine contractions. Both Sofinnova Partners and Sofinnova Ventures, independent firms with an intertwining history, were PregLem stakeholders. PregLem provided an exceptional 5 times return for Sofinnova Ventures, the firm's General Partner Jim Healy said in an interview with our Pink Sheet colleagues. The firm led PregLem's CHF 36 million Series B round in 2007. – P.B.

Acacia Pharma: The repurposing biotech said September 2 it has raised £15 million ($23.5 million) in a Series B round to fund completion of the Phase III development of APD421, its lead product for post-operative nausea and vomiting. Other companies already market the active ingredient in APD421 in a CNS indication. The fundraising, which comes two years after the Cambridge, UK-based virtual company raised $10 million in a Series A in March 2011, adds two new VCs to its investor group, Fidelity Biosciences and Novo A/S, who join Series A contributors Lundbeckfond Ventures and Gilde Healthcare. The funds extend Acacia's cash runway to mid-2015 and are enough to complete Phase II studies of the company's second pipeline product, APD403, for the prevention of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting, the company said. Although the company plans to find marketing partners for its products at the end of Phase III, the strength of its financial backing means Acacia could consider commercializing its own products, he said. Acacia CEO Julian Gilbert is no stranger to repurposing medicines, having co-founded Arakis, a UK company with a similar strategy that was sold to Sosei in 2005 for £107 million.  Arakis worked to repurpose the muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium bromide for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), now marketed by licensee Novartis AG as Seebri Breezhaler. - J.D.

All the Rest: CNS-focused Intra-Cellular Therapies took in $60mm (18.9mm common shares and $15.3mm in bridge notes) from institutional investors, then reverse merged with a public shell to gain its listing on the OTC…developing late-stage OTO201 and OTO104 for disorders of the inner and middle ear, Otonomy brought in $45.9 million in Series C financing…Argos Therapeutics raised $42.5mm in a Series E round led by Pharmstandard OJSC, which with other first-time backer Green Cross, will take territorial rights to Argos’ AGS003 late-stage metastatic renal cell carcinoma candidate…Syndax Pharmaceuticals’ $26.6mm Series B round will help advance Phase III Entinostat, an HDAC inhibitor for metastatic breast cancer…Also in Series B rounds, antibiotics developer MicuRx took in $25mm; Arsanis, an anti-infectives developer built around Adimab’s antibody platform, with many of the same backers as Adimab, brought in $20mm; Icon Bioscience, a company with a late-stage cataract surgery candidate, raised $14.9mm; Swiss-based Mind-NRG, focused on neurodegenerative diseases, brought in $8mm; and Rani Therapeutics, developing oral drug delivery formulations for existing large-molecule pharmaceuticals, raised an undisclosed amount…Triton Algae Innovations completed a $5mm Series A to support expansion of its PhycoLogix synthetic biology platform for producing proteins in algae and commercialization of its PhycoShield line of proteins…OTC-traded immunotherapeutics developer Stellar Biotechnologies completed a $12mm placement of 11.4mm units at $1.05…Catalyst Pharmaceutical Partners, which targets rare neuromuscular and neurological diseases, completed a $15.1mm registered direct offering of 8.8mm shares at $1.72…Two biotechs filed for initial public offerings:  lipid-based nutritional ingredients and medical foods maker Enzymotec, the third Israeli company to list on Nasdaq this year; and MacroGenics, a developer of MAb therapeutics for cancer and autoimmune diseases…Three pharmacos set IPO terms: Fate Therapeutics (stem cell-modulating treatments for orphan diseases) is offering 4mm shares at a $14-16 range; Evoke Pharma (GI-focused spec pharma) plans to sell 2.1mm shares between $12-14; and protein and antibody drug developer Five Prime Therapeutics is offering 4mm shares at a range of $12-14…infectious diseases player ContraFect raised $11.8mm in an oversubscribed convertible debt offering – which initially targeted $5 million – to support CF301, its bacteriophage lysin for staphylococcus aureus bacteremia infection…concurrent with its spin-off from Elcelyx Therapeutics, NaZura BioHealth raised $5mm in debt…Oxygen Biotherapeutics completed a $4.9mm debt offering to advance its Phase IIb Oxycyte PFC emulsion for traumatic brain injury…In fund news, former Dendreon CEO Mitch Gold has partnered with investment analyst David Miller to open a new multimillion-dollar hedge fund, Alpine BioVentures, to invest in newer biotech start-ups, particularly those focused on cancer and rare diseases. -- Maureen Riordan

Skeptical kitten photo courtesy of flickrer Jeff Eaton, who also shoots sandwiches.

What If Deals Of The Week Had A Party And Nobody Showed Up?

What if they had a week and no biopharma deals happened? We’re not quite at that point but it has been slow-going, to put it mildly, on the deal-watching front.

Did everybody go on vacation all at once? Well, your trusty correspondent got back from his time off about two weeks ago and Deals of the Week has a schedule to keep. Let’s see what activity we can find.

There have been a few deals the week of Aug. 19, although none of the blockbuster sort or even all that close (see below). In fact, deal rumors may have outnumbered actual signed deals this week – they certainly set more tongues wagging. The biggest news in business development and M&A likely was renewed speculation that rare disease specialist Shire might be a buyout target for big pharma. The rumor gained in plausibility coming on the heels of Perrigo’s $8.6 billion acquisition of Elan on July 29 for the primary purpose of benefiting from Irish tax laws.

Focused on over-the-counter products, nutritionals and generic drugs, Perrigo bought out Elan largely for its appealing tax structure, as well as the royalties it earns from multiple sclerosis blockbuster Tysabri (natalizumab). Because Perrigo is merging with Dublin-based Elan, rather than just moving to Ireland, the new combined company will be able to take advantage of that country’s tax rates, which are considerably lower than those in the U.S.

On Aug. 15, Perrigo held its first earnings call since the transaction, saying that its expectations for increased global business are expected to offset slowing U.S. revenues in its OTC business. The company reported overall record net income of $967 million for its fourth quarter, a 16% increase from the year-ago period, and income of $3.5 billion for its fiscal 2013, which ended on June 30, a 12% increase from 2012.

While sales for its consumer health care business, which includes OTC drugs and pet-care products, grew 16% to $562.4 million for the quarter, Perrigo executives said during the call that sales in some OTC categories are slowing, a trend that likely will continue. Perrigo’s nutritionals sales, comprising supplements and infant formula, reached $150 million, an 11% increase year-over-year, with all categories within the segment growing and new product sales reaching $7 million.

It’s unclear whether Bristol-Myers Squibb, said to be reprising its interest in acquiring Shire, would be looking for tax advantages – Shire is headquartered in Ireland, as well, but also maintains corporate offices in Philadelphia and Cambridge, Mass.

Industry analysts on Wall Street and in London have said the pharma’s main interest might be Shire’s business model of producing and selling high-priced drugs for small specialist populations that discourage generic competition because they are hard to make and extremely targeted. However, if Bristol bought Shire, Irish tax rates would apply to any existing Shire products sold by Bristol and it likely could use the Irish rate on future products of its own, resulting in a reduced, blended tax rate for its overall business.

Shire has pursued an interesting business development strategy, using small to mid-sized acquisitions, particularly of companies with late-stage or commercial assets, to transform itself. The centerpiece of this strategy was the 2005 buyout of Transkaryotic Therapies that led to the establishment of its growing Human Genetic Therapies division and became a primary competitor to Sanofi’s rare-disease subsidiary Genzyme.

In an effort to build a franchise around bio-engineered skin-substitute product Dermagraft, Shire bought out Advanced BioHealing for $750 million in 2011, but to date that deal has not succeeded greatly in growing the Regenerative Medicines unit. On July 25, Shire announced that sales of Dermagraft, the primary motive for the acquisition, declined 57% to just $22 million during the second quarter.

Overall, however, the company reported sales growth of 7% during the quarter and said it was on track for double-digit full-year sales growth as it had projected.

Recently, it was reported that Shire has hired Lazard as a financial investor to assist it if a hostile takeover bid emerges. Bristol reportedly was going to offer nearly $17 billion to purchase Shire this past May. Shire’s share price has been trending up lately, nosing over the $100 mark on July 11 and continuing to incline. The stock closed trading Aug. 21 at $114.02, undoubtedly helped by the new rumors of possible takeout interest.

While DOTW waits for that potential story to percolate, we point you to these actual transactions that occurred over the past week:

Shire/Santaris: Meanwhile, Shire transacted some actual business, announcing an extension Aug. 23 of its strategic alliance with Santaris Pharma to discover and develop RNA-targeted therapies for rare diseases. Specific financial terms were not disclosed. Under the original deal, signed in 2009, Santaris has been using its proprietary Locked Nucleic Acid (LNA) platform to discover and begin development of preclinical oligonucleotides against rare genetic disorder targets selected by Shire. Shire paid $6.5 million upfront for access to the technology along with research funding and $13.5 million for completion of early studies in the original deal, which specified five targets. Santaris also was eligible for up to $72 million in milestones for each program, plus sales royalties on any product reaching the market. The revised deal adds an undisclosed number of additional targets to the collaboration. Santaris gets upfront cash and research funding, and again can earn milestones and royalties if a product derived from the target research gets to market. As with the initial agreement, Shire holds worldwide development and commercialization rights to any resulting compounds.

Adimab/Celgene/Innovent: Less than a month after antibody-engineering firm Adimab signed a pair of non-exclusive R&D partnerships with GlaxoSmithKline and Biogen Idec, the New Hampshire biotech struck again, announcing a pair of deals Aug. 20. This time, Adimab has signed discovery partnerships with Celgene and Innovent, again to generate therapeutic antibody candidates against multiple targets. The July deals brought Adimab’s total to 19 partners, including a “who’s who” of big pharma and big biotech, and the company said it expects to sign at least three tech-transfer deals a year through 2015. However, the deals with GSK and Biogen transferred non-exclusive rights to Adimab’s antibody discovery and protein-engineering platform, giving them expanded use of the technology beyond prior tie-ups with the biotech. In the Celgene agreement, Adimab will use the platform to generate antibodies against multiple, undisclosed therapeutic targets. Adimab receives an undisclosed upfront payment, while Celgene will have the option to develop and commercialize all antibody candidates resulting from the collaboration. For any candidate that Celgene options, Adimab will receive a licensing fee and be eligible for clinical milestones and royalties on product sales. Meanwhile, Adimab and China-based Innovent will partner on a single program to discover, develop and commercialize an antibody-based therapeutic against an undisclosed target. Innovent will coordinate all initial product development, including manufacturing and clinical trials. Each company will retain the right to develop and commercialize any resulting drug candidate in its respective geographic territories. Innovent will hold those rights in China, while Adimab retains U.S., European and Japanese rights to the program. Innovent will compensate Adimab for discovery and optimization of therapeutic leads, while Adimab will reimburse Innovent for specific development costs.

Evotec/Jain Foundation: Germany’s Evotec AG, a drug-discovery alliance and development partnership company, and the Jain Foundation announced Aug. 21 that they have extended and expanded their research collaboration in skeletal muscular dystrophy diseases. No financial details were disclosed. Based in Bellevue, Wash., Jain is a privately funded foundation whose goal is to cure muscular dystrophies caused by deficiency of dysferlin protein. In a release, foundation CEO Plavi Mittal said the collaboration is moving toward the screening of compound libraries with Evotec. “This is an important step toward accomplishing our mission of finding a therapy for Limb-girdle muscular dystrophy type 2b/Miyoshi Myopathy,” he said. Earlier this year, Evotec partnered with Harvard University to identify and develop a new class of small-molecule inhibitors of bacterial cell wall synthesis. Evotec is applying its drug-discovery technologies and expertise toward developing anti-bacterial agents that target peptidoglycan biosynthesis, while the university brings assays, anti-bacterial chemical starting points and x-ray crystallography tools to the collaboration.

Mount Sinai Medical Center/Exosome Diagnostics: Mount Sinai Medical Center (NY)’s Icahn School of Medicine is collaborating with Exosome Diagnostics Inc. on research and development of real-time nucleic acid-based body-fluid diagnostics to advance personalized medicine in areas such as oncology and inflammation. From the work, Exosome anticipates pursuing commercial development of potential in vitro diagnostics. Under the five-year collaboration, Mount Sinai researchers will get early access to Exosome technology for use in targeted molecular research, the two New York-based organizations said Aug. 21. The Exosome technology enables real-time capture of genetic biomarkers that are responsible for disease directly from blood, urine and cerebrospinal fluid without need for a tissue biopsy. The medical center will retain rights to molecular biomarkers associated with disease progression and drug response under the agreement, while Exosome will get commercial development rights to any molecular in vitro diagnostic products that may result from the collaboration.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

How Vitae Tries To Provide An Optimal Environment For Innovation

One of the best things about having time to sit down with a company's executive team and discuss matters such as pipeline and business strategy at leisure is the chance to intersperse more philosophical questions that address how a company views itself and the work environment it tries to provide.

In meeting a few weeks ago with the executive team at Vitae Pharmaceuticals near Philadelphia for a profile in "The Pink Sheet," I got more information than I could process on the firm's structure-based drug design process, the genesis of its proprietary Contour technology platform and its plans for pipeline assets in indications such as chronic kidney disease and acute coronary syndrome.

Vitae Pharmaceuticals CEO Jeff Hatfield

But as I spoke with CEO Jeff Hatfield, CFO Tina Fiumenero and Chief Scientific Officer Richard Gregg, all of whom came to the clinical-stage company from Bristol-Myers Squibb, I wanted to ask about the best environment for innovation in drug discovery and what precisely the term "biotech" even means in 2013, if such a definition can be nailed down.

As Hatfield explained that he brought in Gregg after initial CSO and company co-founder John Baldwin retired, he noted both the depth of Gregg's Rolodex and the fact that he had led discovery in all areas at Bristol. Therapeutic agnosticism is important for a company that wants to go where its technology takes it. Hearing Gregg talk about Vitae's quicker, streamlined decision-making and its speed in drug discovery against challenging targets, I posed the question: "Coming from big pharma, would you say it's necessary to leave big pharma if you want to innovate in drug discovery?"

Vitae CSO Richard Gregg

Gregg's response to the somewhat loaded question is a bit on the cautious side, but still interesting.

"I think that one does not have to leave big pharma but it is easier [to innovate] in a biotech environment. It’s not that big pharma can’t [do it] but with a lot of the bureaucracy and decision-making processes, they make it difficult to be truly innovative there. I’m not going to say it’s impossible, but it’s easier in biotech," he said.

Hatfield then elaborated on the innovation topic: "I think there’s an awful lot to the culture and environment that people work in ... I don’t think the scientific talent is different in either direction - I don’t think it’s better in big pharma, I don’t think it’s worse in big pharma. What is really different is the culture that exists between a large organization, whether it’s in pharmaceuticals or manufacturing Twinkies, it doesn’t matter, big organizations have an organizational behavior, a culture, that by necessity is more structured, more controlled, and in a small organization, that’s much less the issue."

Culture is a big part of what defines biotech, in 2013 as in 1999, the CEO added. But does Vitae, with its focus on small-molecule drugs for primary-care indications, really fit the definition of biotech?

"Everybody has a slightly different definition of biotech," Hatfield said. "Yes, we do view ourselves as biotech, because we are innovative and I think that's a better essence of what biotech is supposed to represent, not whether it is small molecule or large molecule. It's pursuit of innovation to make a difference in the world."

But, besides its technology, what makes a company like Vitae innovative? Hatfield thinks getting buy-in from the ground-floor level R&D team is a good place to start. In other words, innovation comes from motivation, which may stem partly from comfort level.

"When we were getting this company going [it was founded in 2002, and Hatfield signed on as chief in 2004], I asked a group of bench scientists to define the culture. I said ‘tell me the environment you want to work in.’ And so they did, and it was not management-driven in the slightest bit. They came up with five principles of what they wanted the focus to be," he explained.

Those five tenets selected by the bench scientists themselves in 2006 as the company's modus operandi? Not surprisingly, the first was innovation - to create rather than copy. Next, they wanted to be evaluated on the basis of success, not the amount of activity, on helping to produce the right compound, rather than just a lot of compounds.

As Gregg alluded to, a third important value for the R&D team was quick decision-making, which the group called "sense of urgency." The scientists made clear they didn't want to hear about committees being organized to ponder the latest idea. They also wanted a teamwork-driven environment in which the chemists and biologists communicate directly and trouble-shoot together.

Finally, easier said than done, they wanted a fun place to work. Which is about as easily defined as what biotech means in 2013. But on the other four measures, the results to date suggest that Vitae may be living up to its own chosen values. Whether that proves to be a lucrative formula remains to be determined.

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