Immunogen and Seattle Genetics – On The Verge Of An Inflection Point

Thursday, May 22nd, 2008

 

This year’s ASCO annual meeting should be a very exciting event for anyone who has been following the field of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). During the conference, investigators will present impressive clinical data generated by ADCs powered by Immunogen’s (IMGN) and Seattle Genetics’ (SGEN) technologies. The data includes studies for Genentech’s (DNA) T-DM1, Seattle Genetics’ SGN-35 and Curagen’s (CRGN) CR011-vcMMAE .  These data will put ADCs on the verge of transitioning from a remote niche to one of the hottest areas in oncology.

(more…)

Immunogen at ASH 2007 – part II (AVE9633)

Wednesday, December 26th, 2007

   

Regardless of IMGN901’s specific case, the impression I am getting from all the scientific material I come across that deals with Immunogen’s (IMGN) technology, is that IMGN901 will probably be the last ADC (antibody-drug conjugate) powered by the cleavable DM1 linker. There are currently no ADC programs, except from IMGN901, that utilize this specific linker. As I mentioned in one of my SGEN’s (SGEN) pieces, Genentech seems to prefer a noncleavable linker for the majority of its ADCs. Another example may be, Centocor, who licensed Immunogen’s technology for arming a antibodies targeted against alpha integrin and evaluated both DM1 and DM4 cleavable linkers with the same antibody. Results from several animal experiments showed that the cleavable DM4 version was much more stable in the bloodstream and active in inhibiting tumor growth than the cleavable DM1 version.

   (more…)

Immunogen at ASH 2007 – part I (IMGN901)

Wednesday, December 26th, 2007

At ASH (American Society of Hematology), Immunogen (IMGN) and its partners presented data on several projects including IMGN901(formerly known as HuN901) for Multiple Myeloma and AVE9633 for AML (Acute Myelogenous Leukemia) .

 

The company presented updated results from its  phase I dose escalation study in Multiple Myeloma patients who have failed prior treatments. IMGN901 was administered weekly for 2 consecutive weeks in a 3-week cycle, and the company reported results from 12 patients in 4 cohorts of 3. The evaluated doses were 40 mg/m2/week, 60 mg/m2/week, 75 mg/m2/week, and 90 mg/m2/week. Immunogen had previously published results for the two lower doses, which included one partial response (PR) and 2 stable disease (SD) in the 60 mg/m2/week cohort. In its ASH presentation, the company revealed that among the 6 patients who received the 2 higher doses (75 and 90 mg/m2), there was also one partial response in a patient at the 90 mg/m2/week cohort, although this patient had to drop out of the trial due to unrelated issues. Of note, the patient who responded at 60 mg/m2 is still on the study, after more than 10 months.

  

I must admit I expected results to be somewhat better, based on management’s remarks in several investor conferences. I wrongly concluded that if a company gets a partial response in 1 out of 3 patients who were dosed at 60 mg/m2, and claims to be very excited about the 2 higher doses, there would be at least one partial response in each cohort to generate a response rate of 33%. Nevertheless, these results are quite positive for two reasons. First, all patients who participated in this trial were heavily pretreated patients, who had already received more than four prior therapies. Second, IMGN901 demonstrated excellent safety profile as no severe side effects were documented. This means that additional patients can be recruited and receive higher doses, that might be more effective.

 

(more…)

Seattle Genetics at ASH 2007 - SGN-33 (part II)

Wednesday, December 19th, 2007

 

 

Chemotherapeutic Drugs in The Clinic – Competitors or Potential Partners?

 

Obviously, SGN-33 was not directly compared to any other agent, so insight gained from comparing SGN-33 to other agents from different clinical trials is far from being conclusive. In addition, a comparison of a naked antibody (that will likely be given in combination with other drugs), to other chemo and combination regimens is not a fair one. Nevertheless, these comparisons are the only means researchers and investors alike have when evaluating the prospects of SGN-33.

The efficacy/safety ratio of SGN-33 is very impressive when compared to available treatments as well as other treatments currently evaluated in clinical trials. The cornerstone treatment for older AML patients is low-dose araC which has less than 20% complete response rate as a single agent (compared with 29% for SGN-33 in the current trial). araC is typically administered with other agents and is currently evaluated in combination with some novel drug candidates. These combinations result in a much better response rate, in the range of 30-60% among a variety of patient populations.

(more…)

SGEN’s Preclinical Programs

Sunday, December 9th, 2007

 

CD70 program

CD70 is a receptor expressed on many types of blood cancers as well as the majority of renal cancer cases. The expression profile of this target is highly restricted to cancer cells, which, combined with its ability to internalize antibodies, makes it a desirable target for ADCs. Seattle Genetics is evaluating a naked antibody as well as an ADC that target CD70, both candidates are based on the same antibody, which was licensed from CLB-Research and Development. The naked antibody, SGN-70, is evaluated for certain blood cancers and is expected to enter phase I during 2008. Another possible use for SGN-70 is for autoimmune diseases, as it is expressed on white blood cells that are involved in the disease, but not on “resting” cells.

SGN-75 is an ADC based on SGN-70, which is currently evaluated pre-clinically for Renal cell carcinoma. This disease, although not as common as prostate and lung cancers, represents a large market opportunity with over 43,000 new cases and almost 13,000 deaths expected in 2007 in the US alone. Although surgical resection of the kidney has high chances to prevent the disease from spreading, nearly one third of patients are diagnosed at advanced stage, where the cancer has spread to additional organs. In addition, more than 30% of patients who undergo resection will eventually develop metastatic disease, for which very few therapeutic options exist. SGN-75 is expected to enter the clinic only in 2009.

 

(more…)

SGEN’s partnership with Curagen (CRGN)

Sunday, December 9th, 2007

 

CR011-vcMMAE is an ADC currently being developed by Curagen (CRGN), based on Seattle Genetics’ ADC technology. The ADC comprises of an antibody against GPNMB, a protein on the surface of melanoma cells linked to a drug payload. Both the drug and the linker in this case are identical to those used by Seattle Genetics in SGN-35. The story behind this agent demonstrates the need of ADC technology and the high value it has in today’s drug development market. It also demonstrates that going after one of the most challenging indication with a relatively new platform, may not be the best way to validate it.

  (more…)

Seattle Genetics’ SGN-35

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

SGN-35, which is Seattle Genetics’ lead ADC, is comprised of SGN-30 and Seattle Genetics’ highly toxic chemo drug – MMAE. SGN-35 is, in fact, the company’s flagship ADC candidate, since it was its first wholly owned ADC to utilize the company’s new ADC technology, including its peptide-based linker and auristatin-based drug. Having both a naked antibody and an ADC based on the same antibody simultaneously in the clinic is quite unusual, but more than anything, this situation is fascinating because it can clearly exhibit the advantages ADCs have over naked antibodies. In that sense, SGN-35 is similar to Genentech’s Herceptin-DM1, which is currently being developed with Immunogen (IMGN). Herceptin-DM1 served as a validation for Immunogen’s ADC technology since it showed very encouraging results among breast cancer patients, who do not respond to naked Herceptin. Hence, if Seattle Genetics can show that SGN-35 succeeds where SGN-30 fails (hint- Hodgkin’s Lymphoma), without causing substantial side-effects, it should be a very strong proof-of-concept.

(more…)

Seattle Genetics’ SGN-30

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

SGN-30 entered phase I in 2002, for the treatment of HL and ALCL. In addition to a good safety profile, SGN-30 managed to show clinical activity, mainly among ALCL patients. The antibody was advanced to a phase II trial which later turned into 2 phase II trials, one for the evaluation in HL and the other in ALCL. Results from the two phase II trials emphasized the trend that had been observed in the phase I trial, as SGN-30 demonstrated great activity among ALCL patients but very modest activity in HL. Of the 35 evaluable HL patients, there was no objective response (decrease of 30% in the tumor load), whereas, 14 out of 46 evaluable ALCL patients (30%) had a response, three of which were durable complete responses. This is quite impressive considering the poor prognosis of these heavily pretreated patients. Although SGN-30 could not beat HL, Seattle Genetics still had several options at its disposal, including an armed version of SGN-30, in which the antibody is conjugated to a drug payload.

Although it is very important to get data about an antibody as a single agent, the activity it shows in combination with existing treatments is where most of the potential lies. A typical strategy with antibodies for cancer includes initial evaluation as a single agent in patients who have no other alternatives, followed by multiple trials in combination with existing treatments and/or in early stage patients, who have better prognosis. Ideally, any drug company would like to see its drug being administered as early and in as many combinations as possible, in order to achieve maximal market share. This is indeed the case with SGN-30, which is currently being evaluated in 3 phase II combination trials.

The first study was initiated in 2006 and is evaluating SGN-30 in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of recurrent HL. This is a relatively large, comparative trial aimed at discovering whether SGN-30 can enhance chemo’s efficacy. The second study, also initiated in 2006, is evaluating SGN-30 in combination with chemotherapy among ALCL patients. A third study of SGN-30 combined with chemotherapy is recruiting pediatric ALCL patients. These trials are financed by the NCI, which enables Seattle Genetics allocating resources to other clinical programs. Despite the promising clinical activity among ALCL patients, the addressable market for ALCL is rather limited, making its clinical development attractive but not too exciting. Obviously, as long as someone else is paying the bills, Seattle Genetics will be more than happy to see SGN-30 advance towards commercial availability, but unless there are stellar results from the HL combination trial, we expect SGN-30 to remain on the backburner, as far as Seattle Genetics is concerned. The real star in the company’s CD30 program is SGN-35.

 

Author is long SGEN

Seattle Genetics’ technology - The Arms Merchant

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

The capability of developing antibodies for cancer can be found at most pharma companies’ R&D centers, either as a result of internal R&D efforts or M&A activity, such as the acquisitions of Cambridge Antibody Technology and Abgenix by AstraZeneca (AZN) and Amgen (AMGN), respectively. Therefore, there is nothing unique about a company that can develop cancer antibodies, even though there are many other differentiating factors between the companies. The crucial element in developing an ADC is linking the antibody to the drug payload. As simple as this concept may sound, its realization is highly complex and challenging, and in our opinion represents the main entry barrier to the field. As ADCs are also termed “armed antibodies”, companies like Seattle Genetics can be viewed as the arms merchants of the antibody industry.

As an arms merchant, the company focuses on two areas: Technologies for conjugating antibodies to toxic drugs and potent toxic compounds that will be attached to the antibodies. The ability to develop highly potent drugs and conjugation technologies is Seattle Genetics’ main asset, since this is the ideal way to differentiate itself and to broaden the company’s pipeline through partnership deals. In an industry where the vast majority of candidates fail, it is imperative for companies like Seattle Genetics to have as many candidates as possible, even if eventually most of the revenues go to the partners. At this stage, with the limited resources Seattle Genetics has, betting on few wholly owned candidates is statistically unfeasible. Although the company has had its share of failures over the years, we believe the advances made both in terms of linkers and drugs will finally enable it to generate a constant flow of candidates into the clinic, whether independently or in collaboration with partners. In order to look at the progress that has been made so far, the best place to start is the failure of Seattle Genetics’ flagship product, SGN-15, an antibody linked to the chemo agent Doxorubicin, whose development was discontinued in mid 2005 after a series of discouraging clinical trials. On top of the usual uncertainties related to drug development, there were probably two main factors that severely sabotaged this candidate’s prospects.

The first factor was the use of an approved chemotherapy drug such as Doxorubicin as the conjugated drug. Chemotherapy agents that are conventionally administered to patients are distributed across the body and affect healthy cells as well as cancer cells, leading to the so typical side effects of chemo. Consequently, approved chemo drugs represent a fine balance between two needs: They must be strong enough in order to kill cancer cells, but not too strong, so the damage caused to normal tissues is acceptable. In contrast, when chemo drugs are linked to an antibody, they can be targeted to tumors specifically, since the antibody guides them. This enables the use of much more potent drugs, otherwise impossible to use in conventional administration. Furthermore, since only a small fraction of the administered antibodies eventually accumulate in cancer cells, it is critical that the few antibodies that do reach the tumors carry a very potent payload. This can be accomplished by two approaches: The antibody must either be loaded with a large amount of drug molecules or a small amount of very potent drug molecules. Although there are efforts on both fronts, the latter approach is more practical, at least for now. Bottom line, in order to have an effective ADC, drug developers should use chemo drugs that are too toxic to be generally administered. This approach was validated by the only FDA-approved ADC, Mylotarg, which utilizes Calicheamicin, a drug that is too toxic on a stand alone basis. Both Seattle Genetics and Immunogen (IMGN) are currently using such compounds as the basis for their ADC platforms: Seattle Genetics picked auristatin, while Immunogen focuses on maytansine. The second disadvantage in SGN-15 is linker instability. An ideal linker should be very stable in the bloodstream but also readily degradable once inside cancer cells, so it would release the free drug only inside target cells. For SGN-15, Seattle Genetics uses an acid-labile linker, which is relatively stable in neutral environment (bloodstream) and very unstable in acidic environment (present in certain compartments inside cells). This kind of linker is used very successfully in Mylotarg for the treatment of acute myelogenous leukemia [AML], making Seattle Genetics’ pick very reasonable at the time. However, SGN-15’s stability in patients proved to be pretty low, mainly as a result of premature linker degradation in the bloodstream, before reaching the tumors. Mylotarg had a great success despite being based on an acid-labile linker because it attacks a blood-borne malignancy and the antibody can find its target quickly, before linker degradation and drug release. In contrast, the dense mass of solid tumors makes them far less accessible compared to blood cancers. Therefore, the ADC must be present in the bloodstream for longer periods at higher concentrations, necessitating highly stable linkers.

By the time SGN-15 was scrapped, Seattle Genetics already had its next generation of ADC technology up and running. On the drug front, the company licensed a potent drug called auristatin E from Arizona State University, which was found to be almost 200-fold more potent than Doxorubicin, and used it as a basis for its own proprietary drug, MMAE. This drug is a very potent anti-tubulin inhibitor that can be synthesized cheaply in very large quantities and subsequently be conjugated to a virtually unlimited number of different antibodies. Another appealing attribute of Seattle Genetics’ conjugation technology is the highly homogeneous population of ADCs, as oppose to other methods, including that of Immunogen. On the linker front, Seattle Genetics chose a peptide-based linker which is cleaved by enzymes that are present inside cells but not in the bloodstream. Upon cancer cell binding, ADCs are trafficked to a special compartment called lysosome, where there is an abundance of enzymes that cleave the linker and release the drug inside the cell. Seattle Genetics’ peptide linker has demonstrated an increase of more than 3-fold in stability in the bloodstream, which, combined with the high potency of MMAE, puts the company’s candidates in a better starting point.

It is crucial to understand that ADCs are not commodity products, but highly complex systems that require a great deal of customization and optimization. Multiple factors, including (but not limited to) cancer type, the target on cancer cells, exact binding site, type of linker, efficiency of drug release, mechanism of conjugation, type of drug and amount of drug payload affect the performance of each candidate. The number of variations for each ADC is high but it is impossible to predict the optimal combination in advance. Thus, the exact antibody-linker-drug combination should be tailored specifically for each ADC candidate, perhaps even for each condition the candidate is aimed at treating. In order to stay relevant, Seattle Genetics must constantly develop new linkers and drugs, in addition to developing antibodies and identifying attractive cancer related targets. It is not surprising though, that the company is currently developing next generation linkers and drugs that will possibly be employed in future projects.

Author is long SGEN

Seattle Genetics - Introduction

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

The market of monoclonal antibodies for cancer is one of the fastest growing segments in the pharmaceutical industry, with several blockbuster drugs such as Rituxan and Herceptin. Although over a year has passed since the FDA last approved an antibody for the treatment of cancer, the extensive activity in the field will surely lead to a substantial addition of antibodies in the coming years. (more…)