« A Biotech Turnaround? | Main | Avant Immunotherapeutics (AVAN) -- What Gives? »

To Antigenics or Not to Antigenics?

Antigenics (AGEN) got a Russian approval for its cancer immunotherapy -- a cancer "vaccine" is the sexy, headline grabbing term. This also created a few seconds of buzz around two other immunotherapy companies, Dendreon (DNDN) and Cell Genesys (CEGE). I mention these two other companies because (for purposes of full disclosure) I own CEGE stock and recommend it in my newsletter service. I also own a full hedged position of DNDN that I can't wait to liquidate when my hedge expires.

In the United States, AGEN has failed to get approvals from the FDA for good reason: Its treatment, Oncophage, didn't work in Phase III trials and didn't even come close -- which is at least a sort of argument DNDN could and did make.

Oncophage targets kidney cancer and was shown to work within a sub-group of patients with "lower-stage tumors," and therefore a better shot at survival. 45% of these patients responded to Oncophage, hence the approval in a Russia looking to build new industries.

A couple of things are going on that are of critical interest to dying patients and some interest to investors:

• I started my career as a biotech wise-guy and sage, and I was a fan of the FDA under Dr. Mark McClellan. I now believe the agency kills far more people in a month than Rumsfeld and successors have done in Iraq. How? The FDA, despite what it says, does not really change its view of trial results for drugs for dying patients who have no hope.

Its statisticians hide behind numbers, insisting trial data be used only based on the original protocol for the trial -- subset analyses not in the original plan are verboten. And this is true even for patients with absolutely no alternative other than a very painful death.

• Medicine is moving worldwide and if Antigenics can treat a cancer patient in Russia, people with money in the United States and Europe will go there for treatment -- treatment that will be a lot cheaper than in the United States, even if Oncophage is approved in the U.S.

Immunotherapies from Antigenics and Dendreon are capital and labor intensive -- treatments are literally customized and prepared in a factory for each patient -- and Russia is a lot cheaper place to do that than other places.

• Professional investors are so disgusted with the FDA and so aware of the vibrant new international medicine market that they are willing to financially support the Antigenics business model. The proof is a new private offering by Antigenics to the tune of $21 million.

Where does this leave investors?

• AGEN is now an interesting play because it may now be able to generate revenue AND prove out its therapy in a distinctive sub-group of patients without needing huge additional infusions of capital.

• DNDN now has a fallback. I believe their interim trial results will not get them an approval due to the way the trial is structured and their final results may not be strong enough under the current regime of statistical fascism at the FDA. So, Dendreon could go to Russia, but probably would go the China or India route if necessary.

• Cell Genesys (CEGE) has by far the best-structured trials -- it provide for patients with and without the current standard of late-stage care, have embedded metrics using immune system biomarkers and are huge. In my opinion CEGE stands the best chance of an FDA approval, but the Russia, India, China option helps CEGE too, as it now has a fallback if needed.

The bottom line here is that this was not a minor announcement by Antigenics. It has far-reaching ramifications and you can expect other companies with good sub-group analysis and life-saving treatments -- but no FDA approval -- to look to Russia, China and India for quick trials, drug approvals and an international base to build out their product.

And this reduces the risk in many companies.

Comments (1)

tredleon [TypeKey Profile Page]:

Michael - Don't be too sure about CEGE's trial because they have "embedded metrics using immune system biomarkers" - GTOP's recent Phase III trial had pre-determined, pre-approved (by the FDA) immune response markers to identify the sub-group of patients that generated "robust" response to their vaccine. And while this sub-group (~40% of the total patient population) generated survival statistics that were well beyond the rest of the population, the FDA dismissed it. It seems like simple logic to me - if the body doesn't generate a specific immune response (i.e. measurable anti-bodies from the vaccine), then there is no reason it would work. So, to establish a sub-group of patients based on how robust their response to the vaccine is and compare them to the rest of the population is "proving" whether the vaccine works, NO? Obviously, the question becomes why did it only generate an effective immune response in 40% of the patients? The simple answer is that you are dealing with very sick patients, whose immune systems have been beaten down by the cancer and the chemotherapy they have received - AGN's sub-group effectively identified this population based on the level of their disease. Theoretically, a vaccine needs a moderately healthy immune system and time (vaccinations occur over months, in most cases) to generate an effective response, so it makes complete sense that some patients are simply too sick to respond and/or their cancer is too aggressive and overcomes their system before the vaccine has a chance to take. In any case, the FDA is not looking at the data this way, so potentially beneficial treatments are going to be dismissed - AGN got lucky and found an agency that looked past the overall statisitics, GTOP did not.

Post a comment


Please login to comment (or sign up here):



You are signed in as . Not you? Click here to log out.
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)


Comment Preview
Preview your comment here

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on April 10, 2008 9:56 AM.

The previous post in this blog was A Biotech Turnaround?.

The next post in this blog is Avant Immunotherapeutics (AVAN) -- What Gives?.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.