When I
became interested in drug development almost 2 decades ago, I just didn’t get
it: why was it that gene-centric biotech was seen as an esoteric, money-losing endeavor,
and why did shot-in-the-dark small molecule drug development represent the pharmaceutical
elite? After all, biology has fully
moved into molecular gear and how could medicine not follow that?
After a quarter of a lifetime I now
understand that what makes sense often takes a decade or two to manifest. So if you are dead sure about your view of the world, stick to your conviction and resist the urge to follow the herd.
The gene-centric drug development revolution
has occurred, long live Oligonucleotide Therapeutics
In 2018
though, gene-centric drug development has taken the pharmaceutical world by
storm. This just 8 years after gene
therapy, RNAi, and oligonucleotides were widely ridiculed for having been hyped and supposedly
failed.
Yes, in
2017, antisense drugs Spinraza (for spinal muscular atrophy) and Exondys 51
(for Duchenne muscular dystrophy) made a big commercial splash, RNA knockdown
for TTR amyloidosis proved positive in 2 large phase III trials, all the while the
first gene therapy products (2 CAR-T cell/gene therapies and 1 ocular gene
therapy) got approved.
This momentum will only pick up speed on 2018. The year is already
starting with an onslaught of drug development VC investments prominently
featuring mRNA and gene-modulation startups (e.g. $270M investment in
personalized/mRNA oncology Co bioNTech, and ~$100M for gene processing plays ExpansionTherapeutics and Stoke Therapeutics).
Further
down the pipeline, we should see approvals and commercializations for at least
3 important oligonucleotide therapeutics drugs: Patisiran (RNAi/Alnylam) and
Inotersen (RNaseH antisense/Ionis) for TTR amyloidosis in addition to
Volanesorsen (RNaseH antisense/Ionis-Akcea) for lowering triglycerides. At the same time, Sarepta will continue to
walk the tightrope with their first-generation PMO splice skippers for DMD hoping
for approvals of additional exons.
RNAi drug
Givosiran should also be speeding towards approval in 2018. After a sweet and brief
phase I/IIa study sponsor Alnylam is pursuing a laser-like direct-into-pivotal
study/biomarker-based approval strategy.
Expect this to become quite commonplace rather than the exception, especially
under the new FDA.
Adding
gravitas to all these activities will be the further commercialization
successes of Spinraza and Exondys51 that will break down pretty much all
commercialization barriers that may have been put up by payors. After all, these are all delay tactics
intended to save the system a few billion dollars (at the cost of childrens’ lives mind you), get a few bureaucratic underlings promoted, but
really won’t stand a chance against the desire of patients and their families
to get access to such foundational drugs.
It is my belief that with the commercial successes of Spinraza and Exondys51, all previous reservations with regard to oligonucleotide therapeutics being mere scientific tools rather than real-world drugs have disappeared among pharma and investors.
RNAi Therapeutics Stock Thoughts for 2018
Moving on
towards the investment end of the business, Alnylam will be a show-me stock which will have its ups and downs
as the market will challenge Patisiran sales numbers against its $12B market
cap. Alnylam knows this and is throwing everything behind the commercialization of Patisiran to the extent that it renegotiated its platform deal with Sanofi to retain full global responsibility for commercializing Patisiran and follow-on ALN-TTRsc02.
The easiest
RNAi money in my opinion will be made with Arrowhead
Pharmaceuticals (~400M market cap) which has impressed me recently with the
vengeance with which it is getting back into the clinic (IND equivalents filed
recently for its HBV and AAT drugs) and between it and Amgen it could have brought
half a dozen drug candidates to the IND stage within the span of just one year (from having zero
in the clinic!). Just by executing on
bringing these drugs to the clinic, Arrowhead’s market cap should exceed those of genome editing high-fliers like Sangamo and Editas (~$1.5B).
The topping
on the cake, however, will come from potentially first proof-of-concept
biomarker data from their GalNAc programs by the end of the year. And who knows what will happen to the stock
if they can declare HBsAg seroclearance based on the legacy HBV program (ARC-520/1)! And this is not all as we have yet to learn
more about Arrowhead’s lung delivery platform which could be a very
big franchise onto its own without much competition.
In terms of
striving towards first proof-of-concept and critical biomarker data for its
GalNAc RNAi platform, Dicerna is similar
to Arrowhead. The difference is that
Dicerna’s goals are not as grandiose as those of Arrowhead (Arrowhead is built
to become a $50-100B biotech juggernaut) focusing its resources on a few (ultra-)orphan
indications which they are addressing with much care and detail. At a market cap of $450M after the recent
conversion of their convertible debt, the downside could be enormous should the
lead program for primary hyperoxaluria stumble. The upside, however, is also significant as they have their eyes set on
2 orphan drug approvals by 2023.
Critically for Arrowhead, Dicerna, and other companies in the space, given the positive news from Spinraza and Exondys51 sales and TTR trial results, the resistance of more conservative investors to invest in second-tier companies so they can grow into substantial multi-billion companies themselves should also be alleviated.
Critically for Arrowhead, Dicerna, and other companies in the space, given the positive news from Spinraza and Exondys51 sales and TTR trial results, the resistance of more conservative investors to invest in second-tier companies so they can grow into substantial multi-billion companies themselves should also be alleviated.
Finally, investors
in Ionis Pharmaceuticals face a critical year. No, this time it’s not
about hitting clinical endpoints and how well their drugs are selling. Instead, Ionis will have to decide its corporate future. Run away if it makes the mistake of continuing to try and
dominate every area of oligonucleotide therapeutics development. It is this ambition and resulting lack of focus that is responsible for the company giving away much of the commercial upside of its drugs to its partners.
As the
basic oligonucleotide chemical building blocks and designs are coming off patent
and more and more disease-focused, nimble companies come online, this train has
left the station. Boy, this company is in
dire need of fresh management blood from the outside world.
The macroeconomic environment also bodes well for a blockbuster oligonucleotides stock year: low
inflation and interest rates, good economic growth at low unemployment, lowered
corporate taxes in the US and an FDA that seeks to speed up and protect innovation in exchange for ensuring that off-patent drugs are highly affordable. It is probably this blue sky, however, that scares me
most and it is my New Year’s resolution to take it easy on my margin
balance for a change.
From Barron's (Jan 16, 2018):
ReplyDelete"New research suggests that human immune defenses may make the gene-editing system CRISPR, used by Editas and Intellia Therapeutics, unworkable."
While not a direct competitive platform to RNAi (because CRISPR makes permanent changes to genes), this appears to be a very big deal.
Comments?
For more detailed info on CRISPR problems:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/search?q=human+immune+defenses+may+make+the+gene-editing+system+CRISPR+unworkable&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1