One of my favourite areas to follow in oncology research is Developmental Therapeutics, whether they be targeted, genomic, epigenetic or immune therapies. At some point, even currently approved products started off life in this category, either in preclinical research or in early phase 1 trials.
It’s almost like a primordial soup from which future pipelines spring.
Following these initial approaches over time can be useful in many ways – you can pick up new trends and emerging drugs earlier than most, and can also step back to see a broader picture of the landscape as it evolves.
While there are no formal developmental therapeutics sessions at the American Society for Hematology (ASH) annual meeting per se, that doesn’t stop the intrepid scientist from creating their own selection, in fact it’s a lot more fun this way!
That’s exactly what I’ve attempted here…
Be warned though, this year, the mix is much more complex and intriguing with a lot of interesting and, in some cases, novel targets to explore and consider, including the deeper and tricky protein-protein ones to hit, which are now receiving more attention as researchers find more creative and indirect ways to tackle the problem.
Our second ASH 2017 Preview goes deep into what for many BSB readers will be intriguing, yet for others… completely unknown.
To get an early heads up and learn more insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.
Post 2016 US Election, we move on and get back to business with an in-depth review of some new science and clinical data.
Yes, it’s time for another Bushidō – “Way of the Warrior” – guide to the key ASH abstracts!
Here we focus on acute myeloid leukemia (AML), a difficult and challenging disease to treat with a high unmet medical need for new effective therapies.
In this Preview we look at key companies in the AML space, as well as a look at what’s happening in classic targets and also some new ones that are receiving notable attention, both preclinically and also in the clinic.
To learn more insights, subscribers can log-in
The BET Bromodomain market is a meaty epigenetics topic we have followed for several years now, including a look at the space back in 2013 on the old Pharma Strategy Blog (Link). The last update on this was ironically at AACR last year when we discussed MYC and bromodomains (Link).
In a remarkable tale of two cities in real life, two companies we discussed in those posts – Constellation Pharma and Tensha Therapeutics – have had markedly different fortunes since then. Roche decided to end their collaboration with the former and went on to acquire the latter instead.
Since we first wrote about bromodomains and BET inhibitors, the niche has exploded in a wildly stunning way… More drugs in the pipeline, more tumour targets being explored, and even novel combinations being evaluated preclinically for synergistic or additive effects. Even I was surprised by how competitive this niche has become based on the offerings at AACR this year.
With all the wealth of new data at the AACR annual meeting and also some other recent presentations I’ve attended elsewhere, it’s time for a more in-depth look at the BET/Bromodomain landscape.
Who are the new players, which tumour targets are now being evaluated, which combinations might be useful?
A word to the wise – this is neither a nerdy science post nor a comprehensive literature review – instead we take a look at the emerging landscape from a new product development perspective.
Science has been absolutely critical to success in all of the cancer therapeutics from targeted therapies to immunotherapies that have emerged in the last decade.
It really doesn’t matter whether you come from a marketing and commercial organisation or the investment community – if you want to make great decisions, you need to understand the basics of the science underpinning the R&D, where the strengths and weaknesses are. The alternative is play Roulette and put everything on Black 11 as a euphemism for whichever company/product/target you have an interest in.
To learn more about this burgeoning niche in epigenetics, subscribers can log-in.
Miami Beach Lifeguard Tower
This week I’ve been at an American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) conference in Miami on “Targeting the Vulnerabilities of Cancer,” part of their Precision Medicine Series (Twitter #AACRpm16).
What’s interesting about AACR small specialist meetings is as well as listening to high quality talks, they create a relaxed atmosphere for networking and catching up with experts informally. The conference this week was relevant to anyone with an interest in cancer drug discovery.
Although cancer immunotherapy remains the hottest topic in cancer drug development, we shouldn’t forget that there are other therapeutic targets worth exploring; several potential new opportunities were highlighted in Miami.
As readers know we don’t share unpublished data on the blog, so what I’ve done is provide a top-line summary of some of the strategic themes and key take homes I took from several of the presentations.
As an aside, If you haven’t already done so, do listen to the latest episode of the Novel Targets podcast – Of Mice and Men – it features excerpts of interviews recorded at the recent AACR annual meeting in New Orleans. I was surprised by some of what I heard!
For more information on forthcoming AACR meetings and workshops, check out the events calendar on the AACR website.
If you would like to read my commentary from the AACR Precision Medicine Conference in Miami on Targeting the Vulnerabilities of Cancer, subscribers can login below or you can purchase access.
This week certainly turned out to be a defining tale of two drugs with a chequered history…
First off, the FDA approved AbbVie/Genentech’s venetoclax, now known as Venclexta, in a subset of CLL patients with 17p deletions. These patients have a historically poor prognosis and the approval goes some way to addressing the high unmet medical need.
Secondly, another biotech company, Clovis Oncology, got slammed by ODAC with a 12-1 vote to wait for phase 3 data from the TIGER-3 trial for rociletinib to better determine the efficacy:safety benefit profile.
For a long while it seemed that AbbVie had nothing but toil and trouble over the tumour lysis syndrome (TLS) issues giving them some significant challenges to overcome, while Clovis were one of the new darlings of Wall Street.
In the final dash to the market, the tables were turned almost at the 11th hour and fortunes stunningly reversed. Yet a mere eighteen months ago, few industry watchers would have predicted the difference in outcomes.
In our latest AACR Preview series, we take a look at Bcl2 inhibition and where some of the emerging opportunities might lie based on new preclinical research that is being presented here in New Orleans this weekend. It makes for interesting reading.
While one tiger is licking its wounds, another is smacking it chops at what the future might hold for new combination approaches; how the tails have literally turned.
To learn more, subscribers can log-in to read our latest article…
Multiple myeloma (MM) has been very much in the news this week after the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) abstracts were released to much anticipation.
Myeloma is largely thought to be an incurable disease despite the option of an autologous stem cell transplant for newly diagnosed patients. That said, I have actually met some people who have had two or 3 transplants over several decades, a testament to their strength and fortitude in enduring such a challenging procedure.
This year, the news media have focused on elotuzumab (BMS/AbbVie), a CS1/SLAMF7 inhibitor that has previously shown clinical activity in earlier trials, after it was showcased in the ASCO Presscast last week. This why you see many articles on the data reported from this particular abstract.
It’s not the most exciting new data in this disease for me though, that honour goes to two other therapeutics of an entirely different kind. They come completely out of left field and what we saw over the last two months really caught our attention and may surprise you too.
Indeed, we saw hints of some of this data at the American Society for Gene and Cell Therapy (ASGCT) meeting last week in New Orleans.
To learn more about these sentiments and insights, subscribers can log-in or you can purchase access to BSB Premium Content below…
Boston: Fallowing on from yesterday’s post about learnings from the AACR-NCI-EORTC conference in immuno-oncology, today’s post focuses on learnings from non-immune R&D, namely monoclonal antibodies and TKIs.
We know that cancer is a very complex topic and that adaptive resistance is increasingly a huge focus, but where are the new developments in this area and what can we learn from them in order to improve outcomes?
Another key area to consider is therapeutic index, that is are we shutting down enough of an oncogenic target’s activity in order to ensure efficacy? We’ve seen this in the anti-angiogenesis field, for example, where many VEGF inhibitors failed before bevacizumab (Avastin) finally cracked the nut in colorectal cancer and shifted the needle in terms of improving overall survival. We are now seeing this happen in other areas too, which will be covered below.
To learn more insights on this intriguing topic, subscribers can log-in or you can purchase access to BSB Premium Content.