Tag Archives: INCY

Incyte’s Jakafi is likely a $1B drug

Posted on by
56

Predicting future sales for a given drug is always challenging, let alone in a case like Incyte’s (INCY) Jakafi (Marketed in Europe under the name Jakavi by Novartis), which is the first drug in history to receive approval for myelofibrosis (MF). With no precedents to serve as a benchmark, it is still unclear how big Jakafi can be. However, based on Incyte’s recent 2013 guidance and remarks from the head of Novartis’ (NVS) oncology business unit, it has a high likelihood to reach $1B already in 2016.
Continue reading →

Biotech portfolio update – 2012 summary and 2013 outlook

Posted on by
94

In the last post of the year, I will try to provide a status update as well as key 2013 milestones for the stocks in our portfolio. I would like to use this opportunity to wish everybody happy holidays and a happy New Year.

Seattle Genetics

Seattle Genetics’ (SGEN) main task is expanding Adcetris’ use outside of approved niche indications (Hodgkin’s Lymphoma and ALCL). As an anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), Adcetris has potential utility wherever CD30 is expressed by tumors. Continue reading →

Top picks for ASH 2012

Posted on by
87

The American Society of Hematology’s (ASH) annual meeting is the most important event in the field of hematology. Although blood cancers represent the minority of cancer cases, the field is garnering a lot of attention thanks to great advancements over the past decade which translated to huge commercial success stories. This year’s meeting, scheduled for next month, will include important data for the following companies.

Continue reading →

Gilead’s Hematology Pipeline – Transformative and Under-appreciated

Posted on by
17

Gilead (GILD) is garnering a huge amount of attention from investors owing to the hepatitis C virus (HCV) pipeline it got from the Pharmasset acquisition. As the market is occupied with the company’s HCV programs, investors seem to ignore additional promising assets in Gilead’s pipeline. GS-1101, which started phase III in leukemia last week, is a good example. I have no intention to downplay Gilead’s HCV pipeline, however, the minimal attention given to GS-1101, one of the promising hematology agents in development, seems unjustified.

Continue reading →

5 Winners of ASH 2011

Posted on by
20

The annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) was concluded last week and provided investors a peek into the future of blood cancer treatment. Below are 5 companies that presented promising data that could change the therapeutic landscape in the coming years. Continue reading →

Exelixis – Setting the Facts Straight

Posted on by
37

Exelixis (EXEL) saw its share price cut in half last week, due to a regulatory setback. Based on what others have published and questions I received there appears to be some confusion with respect to  the implications for the company. I decided to address this issue using a questions and answers format, based on the many inquiries I received. Hope this format sheds some light on the situation.

Continue reading →

Drugs to Watch at ASCO 2011

Posted on by
16

More melanoma breakthroughs

This year’s meeting will probably be remembered as a historical event with regards to melanoma. Last year, it was a phase III trial for BMS’ (BMY) Yervoy (ipilimumab), which was the first in history to show a survival benefit in advanced melanoma patients (discussed in my ASCO 2010 write up). This trial led to Yervoy’s historical approval 3 months ago.

This year, investigators will present studies evaluating Yervoy as well as Plexxikon/Roche’s vemurafenib in pretreated melanoma patients. Yervoy was evaluated in combination with chemotherapy while vemurafenib was compared with chemotherapy. According to BMS’ and Roche’s press releases, both studies were successful and each drug led to a survival benefit.  The extent of this benefit is still unknown and will be revealed only at the conference. Continue reading →

Lessons Learned from Sanofi’s Failure

Posted on by
16

Last week, Sanofi-Aventis (SNY) announced disappointing results from a phase III trial evaluating iniparib in breast cancer. The drug failed to improve survival and progression-free survival (PFS) in breast cancer patients and although actual data were not published, approval is unlikely even for a subset of patients. Failed phase III trials are quite common in oncology, a field with one of the highest attrition rates in the pharmaceutical industry. Nevertheless, iniparib’s failure is particularly disturbing, as the phase III was supported by compelling results from a randomized controlled phase II trial as well as strong scientific rationale. Importantly, this trial could have broader implications as it raises questions regarding the role of randomized phase II trials as a go/no go decision point for pivotal trials. 

Continue reading →

Incyte Concludes an Exceptional Year

Posted on by
18


Earlier this week, Incyte (INCY) announced positive phase III results for its lead agent, INCB424, in myelofibrosis (MF). Although the full data set was not published, it will almost certainly lead to FDA approval, opening up a $200-$300 market in the US alone. Another similar phase III trial which will be reported in the coming months should support approval in Europe as well.   

Continue reading →

Pfizer’s failure provides clarity for Arqule

Posted on by
19



Yesterday Pfizer (PFE) announced that Sutent failed to prolong survival of lung cancer patients when given in combination with Tarceva. The drug led to an increase in progression free survival (PFS), which was the secondary endpoint of the study. The results are not published and there are several open questions such as the extent of PFS improvement, benefit across different subtypes and use of Sutent in patients from the placebo cohort after progressing on Tarceva. Nevertheless, chances to see Sutent+Tarceva  as a standard of care for 2nd/3rd  line NSCLC are slim.

Pfizer’s failure provided some clarity for Arqule (ARQL) and its partner Daiichi Sankyo, who plan to initiate a phase III study for ARQ-197 in combination with Tarceva. The indication Arqule is pursuing is very similar to that pursued by Pfizer, so had the Sutent trial been successful, it would have adversely affect ARQ-197’s prospects in general and potentially the required clinical route. Continue reading →