Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Amarin: The Possible Procedural Error In The District Court Judgment https://seekingalpha.com/article/4335584-amarin-possible-procedural-error-in-district-court-judgment
Eols apparently is having some early success. Evolus Accelerates Next Phase of U.S. Launch of Jeuveau™ with ‘#NEWTOX NOW’ Consumer Conversion Program $EOLS https://seekingalpha.com/pr/17534984
FWIW, I reached out to IR last night and got the response below very late last night. I give Revance IR credit for making the effort to support their shareholders.
We share your disappointment with the current share price and are busy both running the business and communicating our truly exciting story to investors.
Internally, we are fully focused on the BLA filing, planning our launch for 2020 and enrolling patients in 5 different clinical trials.
Externally:
- We secured 2 major articles over the past week - one in the SF Business Journal (focused on our move into therapeutic indications) and another in the Wall Street Journal (focused on the threats to Allergan's Botox).
- Early in the week, we issued 2 press releases - one on a presentation of our SAKURA data at a major global medical congress in Monaco and the other on our new VP of Marketing from Allergan.
- Yesterday, we spoke at the Needham Healthcare Conference and met with 7 potential investors
- Today and tomorrow we are on a roadshow to see more than 10 potential investors in NY, Philadelphia and Baltimore.
- Also today, a small group of investors got to visit one of our SAKURA investigators at her office in Beverly Hills to see how see runs her practice and hear what she thought of the new neuromodulators -- such as DAXI -- on the horizon.
- Next week, one of our sell-side analysts is bringing 7 investors to Revance for a presentation and tour of our manufacturing facility.
Feedback we get indicates the company stock is in the doldrums as investors await the next big catalyst before they feel they need to jump in. We expect our next major announcement may be regarding our biosimilar agreement with Mylan, as we await the official meeting minutes from the FDA so we can finalize a potential clinical plan and timeline.
Hope that update helps!
Like a said this is my trading account and I bought these shares yesterday under $15, so I was taking profit. I have a large core position that I have held for several years from $11 to $37 to $15. I plan to hold these shares for a long time, but I also try to generate some income from trading and selling covered calls. I already replaced my trading shares under $15 again, but I was speculating as to why the seller keeps dumping shares and how much longer it may last. I agree that recent news has been very positive and there is some buying interest, but every move up is met with someone dumping more shares. I am ready for them to go away.
Not sure who is selling at this price. FWIW, there was some buying interest this morning, as I sold 11,000 shares in my trading account at average price over $15.50 in pre-market trading and the bid at 9:28ET was $15.55, so I was expecting the price to start recovering today. However, a big seller came in at the open dumping shares. Not sure if this is related to the secondary, but I hope they run out of shares soon.
A new hire from Allergan. Ms. Conway is a leader in the global specialty pharmaceutical arena, with more than 20 years of marketing and commercial experience. She joins Revance from Allergan, Inc., where during her 16-year tenure, she held increasingly responsible roles in product and strategic marketing. She was most recently an Associate Vice President in Marketing, leading the creation and implementation of innovative product launch strategies to drive growth in a highly competitive marketplace. https://investors.revance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/revance-appoints-former-allergan-marketing-veteran-taryn-conway
Revance press release about Sakura 3 results presentation, https://investors.revance.com/news-releases/news-release-details/sakura-3-trial-results-presented-podium-worlds-largest-medical. Hope they can generate some buying interest and looking forward to the upcoming BLA filing.
Thanks to Roy's 'failures' like EGRX and ENTA, I retired at 55 and my daughter will be graduating from med school debt free. I also have a large position in RVNC, and I expect that it too will be very profitable within a couple of years. Roy doesn't tell anyone to buy or sell; he just shares his insight and it is very much appreciated.
Here's a new seeking alpha article, https://seekingalpha.com/article/4252107-watching-revance-therapeutics. Nothing new, but it does draw attention at how ridiculously under priced RVNC currently is.
Yesterday's (3/18) NPR Marketplace show has a clip (last 5 minutes of the show) about Botox use demographics, https://www.npr.org/podcasts/381444600/marketplace
It was Jeanie Herbert and I was impressed with the prompt response. I was also reassured by her comments about valuation, but I would really like to see senior management purchase shares at market price.
I sent an email to investor relations after market close expressing frustration with current valuation and requesting that the company reassure the investment community, and I requested that senior management add shares at the current ridiculously low price. I got this response an hour later:
Thanks for your long-term support and this email -- I shared your feedback with our executives.
Just so you know, our management team buys shares through the Employee Stock Plan, so that does not get a lot of visibility, but is issued every 6 months. Dan Browne (CEO) put a 10b5-1 plan into plan a year ago and that plan periodically sells shares automatically and seems to get more visibility than his purchases. He is a substantial individual holder. With nearly $300 million in cash, the valuation clearly doesn't reflect the potential we believe DAXI will bring to the market.
As you are aware, we have continued to deliver on our milestones and the SAKURA trial results were again outstanding. The recent news we shared on the Fosun/China deal and the biosimilar viability were also significant. We're clearly not being rewarded -- similar to other dermatology stocks that have also been out of favor.
We were on the road this week...spoke at two healthcare conferences and met with more than 20 large institutional investors. We will be active again in April. We have the upcoming BLA/FDA filing and hope to share more on the Mylan biosimilar deal in this first half of the year, as potential near-term catalysts for the stock.
I sold out of MNTA at 12 a year or 2 ago for the same reason and noticed they hit 16 today, so go figure. However, my biggest gains by far came from investing in EGRX and ENTA when Dew recognized the value of these companies way before the market did. My only regret was selling too early. I trust his instincts and I agree with his investment thesis, so I view this recent bump as a buying opportunity. Revance is now my biggest position as we are only about 12-14 months away from approval with the best in class product in a fast growing market, whether we partner or not. If you liked RVNC at 40 in 2015, you have to love it now at 17, derisked and that much closer to market.
I am not opposed to a partnership to help market RT002, but Revance has already paid for the cost of development for Glabellar lines. Others on this board have more experience in this industry, but 50% or more share of sales seems too high a price. There is currently no real competition to Botox, as the other toxins are me too products that are forced to compete on price. RT002 is the first differentiated product that will have a 6 month label, so I don't think a large sales force is necessary for a best in class product in a niche market.
I share the frustration as I have held my shares from $13 to $37 to $17, but I would be more frustrated if we give away a large percentage of sales for a partnership. I didn’t like the dilution at 17, but in the long run it want be significant if Revance can reach $1 billion or more in sales within 5 - 7 years. I think that target is reasonable if they succeed with just a few of the therapeutic indications they’re pursuing.
Revance does have the phase 3 Aspen trial for Cervical Distonia, with 1st patient dosed second quarter of last year, https://investors.revance.com/static-files/fa582118-0191-44ae-b904-bb3d91e0fc1c.
It’s always challenging to value a development stage biotech, but IMO Revance is ridiculously undervalued, as Sakura 3 results confirmed the 6 month duration and helped derisk the program. As Roy noted, Revance is all but assured to launch best in class drug in a fast growing market. Assuming RT002 captures just 20% share of glabellar lines (or about $200 million) then at 8 times sales, RVNC would be worth about double current price. Per slide 12, the company has a target of $1 billion in sales by 2023-2026, so if they succeed, the valuation will be much higher.
While I was disappointed with the price of the recent secondary, I think that Revance (after Sakura 3 results) is a more valuable company today than it was one year ago when it was trading in the mid-30s. If Revance comes anywhere near the $1 billion in sales that they project in 2023-2026 per their most recent presentation, https://investors.revance.com/static-files/fa582118-0191-44ae-b904-bb3d91e0fc1c, slide 12, then I think dilution even at much discounted price is preferable to giving away large share of sales for a partnership.
I think partnering would be helpful for near term price support, but Revance has significant upside regardless of whether they partner or go it alone. The real advantage they have is a best in class product in a fast growing market. They have enough cash to get through approval, and I don't think significant dilution would be required for commercialization. They shouldn't need a large sales force for the aesthetic market if they get the 6 month label. I took advantage of the recent selloff to add to my already oversized position.
You may get your wish as I got an order filled at $18.01 after hours. On the other hand, there is a steady buyer of February 20 calls between .75 and .90, so somebody is betting the price will recover pretty quickly.
Not sure who is selling shares under $18.40, but I am buying. Also sold over 100 February 20s for .75
This is also my biggest position. Dew, your research and analysis are very much appreciated!
Flexion is very volatile and it has a large short position. As Roy noted, it's likely some of the selling is due to investors who were hoping for a buyout or looking for a short term trade upon Zilretta approval. I am holding my shares.
Knee OA is a very large market growing at double digit rate with very few non-opiod and non-surgical treatment options. Average analyst estimates for peak Zilretta sales are between $600 million and $1.4 billion. During a recent investor call, Dan Deardorf, the head of FLXN commercial operations, said he is comfortable with these estimates. Deardorf led the commercial launch of Synvisc for Genzyme (now Sanofi). This product is still generating close to $1 billion in sales, despite the fact that American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons no longer recommends Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid due to lack of efficacy, http://newsroom.aaos.org/media-resources/Press-releases/aaos-releases-revised-clinical-practice-guideline-for-osteoarthritis-of-the-knee.htm
Zilretta does show clinically significant improvements in pain, stiffness, and knee related Quality of Life, in a head-to-head trial vs standard corticosteroid injection (slide 42).
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AMDA-2IAS8C/4047353816x0x948996/60632948-8678-47E1-B572-533DEDC8BC5F/Investor_Analyst_Day_Presentation_MASTER__FINAL_10_July_2017.pdf
More importantly, Zilretta is safer for use in patients with type 2 diabetes because it does not cause a noticeable increase in blood glucose as opposed to immediate release corticosteroids, where injections can cause hypoglycemia in diabetics. Approximately 23% of patients with OA treated with intra-articular (IA) injections of corticosteroids have type 2 diabetes (slide 48). There are currently ~4.5M DM patients with knee OA and this number is
expected to rise dramatically. Based on these numbers, a billion+ in sales of Zilretta does not seem far-fetched. Disclosure, FLXN is one of my largest positions.
I, for one, very much appreciate Dew sharing his insight and analysis. While I have a loss on my MNTA position, I am responsible for my own investment decisions. That being said, I have followed Dew for a few years and I have made a lot of money from the information and analysis he provides. The biggest winners in my portfolio have come from Dew, including EGRX, ENTA, RVNX.
Positive article from seeking alpha: https://seekingalpha.com/article/4098822-revance-therapeutics-slightly-derisked-year-end-runup-play
Regarding your comment that RVNC will need to raise funds to build out manufacturing, Dan Browne indicated they have enough capacity for initial launch.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4050219-revance-therapeutics-rvnc-ceo-dan-browne-q4-2016-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single
Dan Browne
On the manufacturing side, we’re going to launch out of this facility. We feel very comfortable what our capacity on both API and finished drug product. As we add-on indications, we look at our capacity, what we may do by ourselves, what we may do in partnership. We may look to expand beyond that. But right now, we’re in position to launch out of this facility. And I think our expectations for the number of units has and/or number of vials is pretty high. If we need to drop on additional aesthetic fill finish capabilities, we will do that. But we are at full commercial unlimited capacity on API, we’re very comfortable for.
Another comment regarding manufacturing:
Dan Browne
As far as mechanism, based on the data that we've seen so far, we haven't changed the mechanism of Daxibotulinumtoxin Type A. It's a formulation science using the peptide to stabilize and create greater efficiency at targeting those neuromuscular junctions. We haven't changed the mechanism. It's an excipient, and not an active [indiscernible] and that's been our strategy as part of both non-clinical, clinical and CMC, which is your final question. On a CMC basis, we've elected to do the right thing and make the investments over a long period of time that's both capital into the assets the infrastructure that’s into the processes, and into people.
And we've made significant investments. We feel very good as where we're at from CMC perspective. Having that experience, having that repeated history of batches with API and finished drug product, has strengthened the manufacturing CMC operations over last several years. We feel very good with where we're at. We obviously got some work to do to consolidate that data into a BLA package. But we're feeling very confident, from a CMC perspective, that we can identify not only the toxin but the peptide and the combination of the two as far as the finished drug product.
Thanks Roy. Here is the article for those that don't have a subscription:
Botox: The Drug That’s Treating Everything
Alexandra Sifferlin @acsifferlin 6:42 AM ET
Forget wrinkles. Botox is now being used to treat migraines, depression, twitching eyes, overactive bladders, sweaty palms and more. Some call it a marvel of medicine; others caution the risks are still unknown. Inside the exploding business and strange science of Botox
During a recent therapy session, one of Dr. Norman Rosenthal’s regulars said he was considering suicide. It wasn’t the first time the patient had entertained the thought, and even though he was on antidepressants and always kept up with his appointments, Rosenthal, a licensed psychiatrist with a private practice in North Bethesda, Md., wanted to offer his patient something else.
“I think you should get Botox,” Rosenthal told him. “You should schedule an appointment on your way home.”
It was peculiar advice coming from a shrink, but not without precedent. In 2014, Rosenthal, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Georgetown University School of Medicine, and Dr. Eric Finzi, an assistant professor of psychiatry at George Washington School of Medicine, published a study showing that when people with major depression got Botox, they reported fewer symptoms six weeks later than people who had been given placebo injections. “I’m always on the lookout for things that are unusual and interesting for depression,” says Rosenthal, who is widely considered an expert on the condition. “I’ve found Botox to be helpful, but it’s still not mainstream.”
It’s also not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for depression, not that that stops doctors from prescribing it that way. Such off-label use of Botox, like that of any FDA-approved drug, is legal in the U.S. That’s because once a drug has been approved by the FDA for a condition, licensed physicians are legally allowed to prescribe it for any medical issue they think it could benefit, regardless of whether it’s been proved to work for that condition.
Now, thanks in large part to off-label use, Botox–the wrinkle smoother that exploded as a cultural phenomenon and medical triumph–is increasingly being drafted for problems that go far beyond the cosmetic. The depression suffered by Rosenthal’s patient is just one example on a list that includes everything from excessive sweating and neck spasms to leaky bladders, premature ejaculation, migraines, cold hands and even the dangerous cardiac condition of atrial fibrillation after heart surgery, among others. The range of conditions for which doctors are now using Botox is dizzying, reflecting the drug’s unique characteristics as much as the drug industry’s unique strategies for creating a blockbuster.
Botox is a neurotoxin derived from the bacterium Clostridium botulinum. Ingested in contaminated food, it can interfere with key muscles in the body, causing paralysis and even death. But when injected in tiny doses into targeted areas, it can block signals between nerves and muscles, causing the muscles to relax. That’s how it smooths wrinkles: when you immobilize the muscles that surround fine lines, those lines are less likely to move–making them less noticeable. It’s also why it’s FDA-approved to treat an overactive bladder: Botox can prevent involuntary muscle contractions that can cause people to feel like they have to pee even when they don’t.
In 2015, Botox, produced by pharmaceutical maker Allergan, generated global revenue of $2.45 billion–more than half of which came from therapeutic rather than cosmetic uses. That noncosmetic revenue is likely to balloon in the years ahead as doctors try out Botox for even more off-label uses and as Allergan conducts studies of its own.
“In the majority of these cases, it’s the doctors at the front line who start using Botox off-label, and then we see the treatment of things we never expected the toxin to work for,” says Min Dong, a researcher at Harvard Medical School who studies botulinum toxins in the lab and has no financial ties to Allergan. “I meet with physicians who are using the toxin everywhere–for diseases you would never know about.”
The potential of the drug is enormous, but it isn’t without risks. Most of the experts I spoke with agree that in small doses, Botox is safe when administered by a licensed professional, but not everyone agrees that its safety extends to all of its newer off-label uses.
In recent years, a number of high-profile lawsuits have been brought against Allergan in which plaintiffs claimed that off-label uses–for ailments including a child’s cerebral-palsy symptoms, for instance, or an adult’s hand tremors–resulted in lasting deleterious side effects. Still, the drug’s acceptance in a growing number of doctors’ offices worldwide, and its revenue growth, show no signs of slowing.
It’s a remarkable arc for a drug that only a few years ago was associated with Hollywood cocktail parties where guests came for Bellinis and left with a forehead full of Botox injections. It highlights the advances that can occur when physicians, seeking new therapies for their patients, explore creative new uses for approved drugs–basically, real-world experiments that take place largely beyond the reach of federal regulators. That, in turn, raises questions about the risks of deploying medicines in ways that have not been fully vetted. But it happens all the time.
The drug has come a long way since its ability to smooth facial wrinkles was first discovered, by accident. In the 1970s, ophthalmologist Dr. Alan B. Scott started studying the toxin as a therapy for people with a medical condition that rendered them cross-eyed. “Some of these patients that would come would kind of joke and say, ‘Oh, Doctor, I’ve come to get the lines out.’ And I would laugh, but I really wasn’t tuned in to the practical, and valuable, aspect of that,” Scott told CBS in 2012. Scott named the drug Oculinum and formed a company of the same name in 1978. In 1989 he received FDA approval for the treatment of strabismus (the crossed-eye disorder) and abnormal eyelid spasms.
Two years later, Allergan bought Oculinum for $9 million and changed the drug’s name to Botox. At the time, Allergan was primarily an ocular-care company that sold products like contact-lens cleaners and prescription solutions for dry eyes, bringing in about $500 million in annual sales. Allergan says it saw Botox as a drug for a niche population: it’s estimated that 4% of people in the U.S. have crossed eyes, for which the drug was initially approved, and Allergan made about $13 million in sales from the drug by the end of 1991.
In 1998, David E.I. Pyott became CEO of Allergan. He was enthusiastic about Botox’s wrinkle-reducing potential, he says, and pushed the company to conduct a series of studies on the matter. In 2002, Botox earned FDA approval for so-called frown lines–wrinkles between eyebrows–marking the first time a pharmaceutical drug was given the green light for a strictly cosmetic purpose. In 2001, the year before Botox was approved for wrinkles, it generated about $310 million in sales. By 2013, the year it was approved for overactive bladder, Allergan reported nearly $2 billion in revenue from Botox.
In just over a decade, the number of people in the U.S. receiving cosmetic botulinum toxin type A injections–mostly from Botox but also from another brand called Dysport, which commands less than 10% of the market–exploded. From 2000 to 2015, use of the toxins for wrinkles increased 759%. It became a cultural phenomenon too, spawning Botox parties, Simpsons jokes, even greeting cards. In 2008, Sex and the City character Samantha famously quipped, “I don’t really believe in marriage. Now Botox, on the other hand, that works every time.”
But today it’s the medical uses of the drug that are the great moneymaker, in part because doctors are getting a better handle on how to use it. Botulinum toxin type A is one of seven neurotoxins produced from Clostridium botulinum. Contracting botulism is bad news: it can cause blurred vision, persistent trouble swallowing and worse. In one recent case, close to 30 people were hospitalized in Ohio in 2015 after attending a church potluck. One person died. The outbreak was ultimately attributed to a potato salad made from improperly home-canned potatoes that were harboring the bacteria. Given its level of toxicity, some countries have even explored its potential use as a bioweapon.
With Botox, however, the dose makes the poison. In medicine, it’s used in such small amounts that most experts deem it safe. “It’s fascinating,” says Dong, the Harvard researcher. “These are the most toxic substances known to man, and they are also the most useful toxins used in medicine right now.”
Botox works by temporarily immobilizing muscle activity. It does this by blocking nerve-muscle communication, which makes the injected muscles unable to contract. Paralyzing muscle activity is how Botox can steady a straying gaze, eliminate an eyelid spasm or stop signaling from nerves that stimulate sweat in a person’s armpit.
Botox has also been shown to prevent chronic migraines, but there, it’s unclear exactly why Botox works. (For doctors, reaching a firm understanding of how Botox prevents migraines will be tricky, since they don’t know for certain what causes the severe headaches in the first place.) “There were multiple clinical trials for migraines, and most of them failed,” says Dr. Mitchell Brin, senior vice president of drug development at Allergan and chief scientific officer for Botox. “It took a long time to figure out where to inject and how much.” Today people who receive Botox for migraine prevention get 31 injections in different spots on their head and neck. The effects of Botox can last about three to six months depending on the condition.
The use of Botox for migraines was, like many other new applications for the drug, a kind of happy accident. A Beverly Hills plastic surgeon observed that people who got Botox for wrinkles were reporting fewer headaches, paving the way for studies about migraines. Similarly, doctors in Europe were intrigued when they noticed that their patients who got Botox for facial spasms were sweating less than usual.
“It’s pure serendipity,” says Brin.
Though people often associate pharmaceutical discovery with giant industrial laboratories and expansive, rigorous clinical trials, the mission creep for Botox–as with many other drugs that have received government approval for one specific use–has been driven by off-label use.
In the case of Botox, doctors who experiment off-label say they do so because they’re looking for better treatment options for their patients. “In my 30 years of medical practice, Botox is one of the most impactful treatments I had ever seen,” says Dr. Linda Brubaker, dean and chief diversity officer of the Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, who independently studied Botox for overactive bladder before the FDA approved it for that condition in 2013.
Many of the women she saw in her practice didn’t want to take drugs for the disorder over the long term. Brubaker found that about 70% of women she treated with Botox reported an average of three leaks a day, compared with the average of five leaks a day at the start of the study. “It’s a very rewarding option for them,” she says.
It’s true that Botox’s ever expanding uses have been largely physician-driven. But drugmakers are also often aware of off-label uses long before those uses are officially recognized by the FDA; that’s how Botox ended up being approved for wrinkles, after all.
Some industry insiders say it’s not unusual, if still legally murky, for drug-company representatives and doctors to share information with one another about the different ways an approved drug may be used. If a doctor notices that, say, a treatment for crossed eyes also “takes the lines out,” he may mention it to the representative from whom he buys the drugs. That rep may share that with another of his clients, and so on.
U.S. pharmaceutical companies are prohibited from marketing a drug for unapproved purposes until they’ve submitted proof to the FDA of its efficacy and gotten the agency’s green light. If they skip that step, they’re breaking the law, and the penalties can be steep.
In 2010, Allergan pleaded guilty and agreed to pay $600 million to resolve allegations that it unlawfully promoted Botox for conditions–including headaches, pain, spasticity and juvenile cerebral palsy–that at the time were not approved by the FDA. In one of the complaints, prosecutors said that Allergan “illegally, vigorously and without any thought to the possible negative health effects to which it subjected patients, promoted off-label uses of Botox.” The U.S. Department of Justice also argued that Allergan exploited on-label uses for cervical dystonia–a disorder characterized by extreme neck-muscle contractions–to “grow off-label pain and headache sales.” Prosecutors also argued that Allergan paid doctors to give presentations and trainings to other physicians about Botox uses that at the time were off-label.
As part of the settlement, Allergan agreed to plead guilty to one criminal misdemeanor misbranding charge and pay $375 million. The company acknowledged that its marketing of Botox led to off-label uses of the drug. Allergan also agreed to pay $225 million to resolve civil charges alleging that the marketing of Botox had caused doctors to file false reimbursement claims, though Allergan denied wrongdoing. The company said in a statement that the settlement was in the best interest of its stockholders because it avoided litigation costs and “permits us to focus our time and resources on … developing new treatments.”
As with any drug, Allergan is legally required to make known Botox’s most severe potential side effects, and in 2009 the FDA required Botox to bear a black-box warning–the strongest type of warning label given to any drug–cautioning that there was evidence the drug had been linked to serious side effects. With Botox, this includes effects spreading from the injection site to other parts of the body, causing muscle weakness, double vision and drooping eyelids.
In physicians’ offices–where patients typically don’t see the box the vials are packed in and therefore may be unaware of the black-box warning–the onus is on doctors to outline the potential risks with any patient choosing to try Botox for any condition, FDA-approved or not.
Ray Chester, an attorney in Austin who has represented several plaintiffs in lawsuits against Allergan, says that just about all the cases he has handled involved off-label use of the drug. In 2014 a New York couple argued that Botox, which they chose to try off-label to treat their son’s cerebral-palsy symptoms, caused life-threatening complications. The family was awarded $6.75 million by a jury. Allergan, which initially planned to appeal, ended up privately settling the case with the family, and the terms of the settlement have been kept confidential.
Though the off-label use of drugs makes many experts–including some at the FDA–uncomfortable, the practice is de rigueur in medicine. It’s how doctors learned that Lyrica, which is approved to treat nerve pain, can treat anxiety, and how they learned that finasteride, a drug that treats enlarged prostates, can reduce male baldness.
“A separate balancing of risks and benefits is necessary for each intended use of a drug, even once it is approved, to ensure the benefits of using the product to treat a particular disease or condition outweigh the risks,” says FDA press officer Sarah Peddicord.
That’s why for any off-label uses that Allergan wants to market to doctors and the public–depression, cold hands, atrial fibrillation in heart-surgery patients–the company must conduct its own clinical trials to show its efficacy and safety.
Allergan does not disclose its research-and-development budget for Botox specifically, but the company’s annual R&D budget is about $1.5 billion. “This drug is not done in terms of its different applications,” says Allergan’s Brin. “It still has many different, exciting, meaningful opportunities for patients.”
The studies using Botox for depression, like other research into Botox’s off-label potential, were so encouraging that they caught the attention of Allergan. In Rosenthal and Finzi’s research, 74 people with major depressive disorder were randomly assigned to receive Botox injections or a placebo. Six weeks later, 52% of the people who received Botox experienced a drop in reported symptoms, compared with 15% of the people given a placebo. “Over 50% of people responding is a high number,” says Finzi. “These are people who have already tried other treatments, and they are significantly depressed.”
Now Allergan hopes to replicate the findings on a larger scale, and the company is currently running its own Phase 2 clinical trial. If its results are in line with Rosenthal and Finzi’s, it would be huge, paving the way for Botox to obtain official approval for the drug as a depression treatment. That wouldn’t change anything for doctors, of course–they can already prescribe it off-label, and some do, with great results–but it would allow Allergan to begin marketing Botox for depression, a change that could dramatically increase its adoption and sales.
Still, Botox’s use for depression raises a question that confounds some researchers. In some cases, how Botox works is evident: the toxin can block the signals between nerves and muscles, which is why it can help calm an overactive bladder, say, or a twitching eye, or the facial muscles that make wrinkles more apparent. In other cases, however (with migraines as well as with depression), scientists are flummoxed. They may have noticed that the drug works for a given condition, but they aren’t always sure why–in sciencespeak, they don’t know what the mechanism is.
With depression, Rosenthal and Finzi think it may relate to what’s known as the facial-feedback hypothesis, a theory stemming from research by Charles Darwin and further explored by the American philosopher and psychologist William James. The theory posits that people’s facial expressions can influence their mood. Lift your face into a smile and it may just cheer you up; if you can’t frown or furrow your brow in worry, perhaps you won’t feel so anxious or sad.
But it could be something else altogether. In 2008, Matteo Caleo, a researcher at the Italian National Research Council’s Institute of Neuroscience in Pisa, published a controversial study showing that when he injected the muscles of rats with Botox, he found evidence of the drug in the brain stem. He also injected Botox into one side of the brain in mice and found that it spread to the opposite side. That suggested the toxin could access the nervous system and the brain.
“We were very skeptical,” says Edwin Chapman, a professor of neuroscience at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, after reading Caleo’s study. But in August 2016, Chapman and his graduate student Ewa Bomba-Warczak published a study in the journal Cell Reports showing similar spreading effects in animal cells in the lab. For Chapman, it explained what he was hearing anecdotally from doctors: that Botox might be influencing the central nervous system and not just the area where it’s being injected.
Ironically, it’s the off-target effects of Botox that have some researchers most excited. “Botox may be working in a way that is different from what we think,” says Bomba-Warczak. “It may be even more complex.”
Chapman and Bomba-Warczak both think Botox is safe when used correctly, but they say their inboxes quickly filled with messages after their study was published. “We were startled by the number of people who feel they were harmed by these toxins,” says Chapman. “We feel these were pretty safe agents. Now it seems that for some people, they believe the toxin can sometimes cause something that may be irreversible. And that’s a total mystery.”
Allergan says Botox is well established as a drug and that the benefits and risks of toxins are well understood. “With more than 25 years of real-world clinical experience … approximately 3,200 articles in scientific and medical journals, marketing authorizations in more than 90 markets and many different indications, Botox and Botox Cosmetic are [among] the most widely researched medicines in the world,” an Allergan rep wrote in an emailed statement.
Even if Botox’s mechanism isn’t always well understood and some of its off-label uses are still unproven, interest in the drug isn’t likely to wane. “Botox is a big cash cow for the physicians’ practices,” says Ronny Gal, an investment analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein who has watched the drug closely for more than a decade. “When I talk to physicians, they say, ‘Botox is not a problem. It works and gives you the result you want.’ If it works for depression and atrial fibrillation, it could be massive.”
In November, the FDA held a two-day hearing asking for expert comment on the agency’s rules concerning off-label drug use and marketing. Some said the practice paves the way for scientific progress and gives doctors and their patients much needed alternatives for hard-to-treat medical conditions. Others said that off-label drug use is primarily financially motivated and that it poses a serious threat to public health, particularly when drugs are used experimentally on children.
Off-label use is a topic the FDA has been eyeing for some time. “There have been many instances where unapproved uses of a drug, even when commonly accepted by the medical community, have later been shown to be unsafe or ineffective or both–sometimes with devastating consequences to public health,” says the FDA’s Peddicord.
It’s unclear how the FDA’s focus will pivot with the next Administration. President-elect Donald Trump has pledged that in his first 100 days, he would be “cutting the red tape at the FDA,” and insiders have speculated that a Trump Administration would loosen the agency’s already limited oversight on off-label use.
But even if the laws remain unchanged, as long as off-label uses are permitted by law, expect doctors to keep pushing the boundaries of Botox’s applications–sometimes in the name of medical progress and sometimes with remarkable results.
Norman Rosenthal, the Maryland psychiatrist who recommended Botox for his suicidal patient, says he’s seen the upside firsthand. The patient, persuaded by Rosenthal, did indeed get Botox shots on his forehead and between his brows. Days later, Rosenthal got an email from the patient. It was a thank-you note. Finally, the patient wrote, he was feeling better.
This appears in the January 16, 2017 issue of TIME.
Akebia secures partnership to fund phase 3 with Otsuka Pharmaceutical in exchange for 50% of the U.S. commercial rights. AKBA shares are up over 30% pre-market. https://www.thestreet.com/story/13932037/1/akebia-funds-late-stage-studies-of-anemia-pill-with-partnership-for-u-s-commercial-rights.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO&yptr=yahoo
I agree with your comments after listening to yesterday's webcast and I added today. The company seems excited about the prospects for RT002 for CD. As Dan Browne pointed out, compared to other open label trials for Cervical Dystonia, RT002 is relatively double in performance and efficacy at week 4. Combined with the Glabberal Lines indication which should be ready to file in early 2018, this is nearly $2 billion in annual revenue where RVNC has shown superior efficacy and duration compared to current market leader. Even if RVNC can capture 30% market share, which seems conservative for a next generation botox with better efficacy and duration, that's over $20 per share in earnings so current valuation seems very low. I am also surprised with the tepid market response today, up about 3% on below average volume.
I never understood what Enhanze was going to do for Humira. My wife uses Humira every other week and it's just a simple SC injection. I don't see much value added by using Enhanze and it appears ABBV doesn't either. In any case, there are numerous Humira generics, the first of which just got approved by the FDA a few months ago, http://www.wsj.com/articles/fda-approves-amgens-biosimilar-version-of-humira-1474669560. I don't think this will be a $20 billion drug by 2020 unless Abbvie has really good patent lawyers. With or without Humira, HALO already has enough recurring Enhanze revenue to be profitable (less PEGPH20 development costs). But what I find most encouraging is Helen Torley said PEG stage 2 data may be delayed until 2017. Earlier this year she suggested that if stage 2 data is good enough, they may consider an early filing due to the significant unmet need with pancreatic cancer. Now I think this may be a distinct possibility.
This was a phase 1 program that IMO shouldn't contribute much to current valuation, http://finance.yahoo.com/news/halozyme-provides-abbvie-collaboration-133000025.html
The near term value drivers are stage 2 data and MabThera approval in the US next summer. I added more shares pre-market at $12.
Here is the new cancer immunotherapy partnership with Genentech. Wish I bought more last Friday at $8.30 :). http://finance.yahoo.com/news/halozyme-announces-broad-clinical-collaboration-133000342.html
Deutsche Bank initiates Halozyme Therapeutics as a buy with a $12 target. Halo is clearly oversold so that's not much of reach, but we are due for a reversal (as are most small cap biotechs). Rituximab approval in the U.S. next year should give a nice boost to the royalty income.
FDA Accepts Genentech's Biologics License Application For Subcutaneous Formulation Of Rituximab, http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fda-accepts-genentechs-biologics-license-123000219.html
From fiercepharma.com, http://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/teva-at-court-s-mercy-key-copaxone-patent-trial-analysts?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=4640400&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1RneVlXUTFaVFUyT0dabSIsInQiOiJkdkJLY0UydTU1TFpNRmozbFdac2UwOWRFMDZxeFRJTjRockI1Rk5MTHZqQU9QdjF3V083alRmN2Q5eHZCdlwvck9vaktZUEllMnF2NVwvSmROeXNMaTFhN0txeFBFeDgwMFBqTHFFeVdiRUhJPSJ9
It’s Day 2 of the 7-day district court hearing into patent protection on Teva’s newer version of multiple sclerosis blockbuster Copaxone, and at this point, things aren’t looking great for the Israeli drugmaker.
So far, trial proceedings “provide little reason to believe that [the] district court may produce a different decision” from the inter partes review process at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeals Board. That board recently nixed three 2030 patents on Teva's 40-mg formulation of its big-earning MS drug.
I don't know much about Maxim, but on tipranks.com Maxim is ranked 1 out of 5 stars. I picked up a some shares at premarket at $11.04. Now trading higher. Here is the Maxim report:
Maxim Group downgraded Momenta Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: MNTA) from Hold to Sell with a price target of $6.00.
Analyst Jason McCarthy commented:
With Teva (TEVA-$51.33-Buy) markedly reducing the Copaxone opportunity through years of patent litigation, Momenta shifted focus towards biosimilars, particularly a biosimilar of Humira, which we believe was a goal outside the reach of the company, even with Baxalta (Shire) as a partner. Recall that Baxalta walked away from developing additional early stage biosimilars with Momenta, which were subsequently partnered to Mylan.
The race for biosimilar Humira could come down to IP. Dosing and formulation patents represent significant hurdles that could delay commercialization of Humira biosimilars for several companies, we believe, including Momenta and Amgen, until at least 2022. More specifically, we are referring to Humira patents protecting dosing ('135) and formulation ('157 and '158).
Amgen was already denied Inter-Partes Review (IPR) for '135. In addition, to our knowledge, Momenta and Amgen both use stabilizing agents called "surfactants" and "polyols" in their biosimilar formulations, which could infringe on AbbVie '157 and '158, two key patents that do not expire until 2022.
The only biosimilar player we are aware of that specifically developed a biosimilar for Humira with a strong focus on IP is Coherus Biosciences (CHRS - $30.03 - Buy). Coherus won IPR vs. AbbVie '135 and has patent-protected formulations that may not infringe on AbbVie '157 or '158, positioning a potential commercial launch in 2019, in our view.
Thanks for the correction. I agree that Fezziwig2008 may overdo his promotion of Halo on Twitter, but he seems knowledgeable about the science and usually provides good information. I had a decent size Halo position last year, but it was called away at 15, which I regretted at the time after it climbed higher. As with a lot of biotechs this year, the price dropped well below what I consider a reasonable valuation, and I rebuilt a much larger Halo position than I've ever had. Without the PEGPH20 trials, Halo would be earning over a $1.00 per share giving them a PE under 10, with the low risk, high growth Enhaze platform. IMO, the PEGPH20 is essentially a free option that offers considerable upside but little downside risk at current PPS.
New article about advantages of Herceptin SC in UK, courtesy of fezziwig2008 on twitter:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2430245/New-breast-cancer-jab-slash-hours-spent-hospital-help-save-NHS-millions.html#ixzz4CVDrubEl
Eagle added to S&P SmallCap 600:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chemical-financial-set-join-p-215100314.html
I have been adding over the last few months because I agree with the Wells Fargo report from last week, courtesy of dough?@tgtxdough on Twitter.
Strong ENHANZE Sales,PEGPH20 Catalyst Coming-see significant upside potential under any scenario into YE16:
We are maintaining our Outperform rating on shares of HALO following 2Q16 results and ahead of updated phase 2 data for PEGPH20 in pancreatic cancer. Strong performance on ENHANZE partner products HERCEPTIN SC and MABTHERA SC, provide increasing downside support for PEGPH20 and in fact, we would argue that without PEGPH20 spend HALO could be highly profitable with an attractive topline growth profile supporting upside from current levels. We do expect phase 2 data in 4Q16 to support phase 3 success with PEGPH20 and as such see significant upside potential under any scenario into YE16.