LONDON
(Reuters) Jun 10 - One of the world's longest running drug development
sagas may draw to a close this month as French firm Sanofi hopes for a
European green light for its new multiple sclerosis medicine Lemtrada
(alemtuzumab) - once known as Campath.
After studying Lemtrada since the early 1990s, he believes the drug's infrequent infusions have a lot to offer patients.
Sanofi,
too, is optimistic about a medicine that would mark its second victory
in MS, following last year's U.S. approval of Aubagio, a pill. It
expects an EMA verdict by mid-year, implying a decision at the agency's
next expert meeting on June 24-27.
Over
the years, enthusiasm for Lemtrada, which works by knocking out
lymphocytes, has ebbed and flowed and there is still no guarantee it
will be approved.
Wellcome,
now GlaxoSmithKline, took an early stab at developing the medicine in
the 1990s - after acquiring rights via British Technology Group - but
gave up. The drug then passed through the hands of U.S. biotech firms
Leukosite and then Ilex Oncology, which struck a partnership deal with
Schering, now Bayer, in 1999.
In
2001, it was approved as a treatment for B-cell chronic lymphocytic
leukemia (B-CLL) and marketed under the brand name Campath - a reference
to the department of pathology in Cambridge where it was created.
Sales, however, never took off.
It
changed hands again after U.S.-based Genzyme bought Ilex in 2004 -
paving the way for a final ownership switch in 2011, when Sanofi bought
Genzyme for $20.1 billion.
CROWDED MARKET
Lemtrada's
prospects were at center-stage in that drawn-out takeover battle,
leading to an eventual deal that included listed contingent value rights
linked to Lemtrada's future success.
Handicapped
partly by its late arrival, analysts predict the drug will not be the
first choice in a market where competition has exploded with the launch
of Novartis's Gilenya and Biogen Idec's Tecfidera, both pills.
"In
Europe, there's little doubt it will be kept for fairly advanced stages
of MS and I would expect it to be positioned similar to (Biogen's)
Tysabri," said Eric Le Berrigaud, an analyst at Bryan Garnier & Co
in Paris.
A U.S. regulatory decision on its use is still pending.
Like
Tysabri, Lemtrada has a potent effect on MS, which is caused by
abnormal immune attacks on the protective sheath surrounding nerve
cells. But its potency also raises safety issues and the fact it is
given through two cycles of infusions, 12 months apart, means any side
effects are not easily reversed.
The
consensus for annual Lemtrada sales is some $700 million by 2017,
according to forecasts compiled by Thomson Reuters Pharma - a number
that could rise "by a few hundred million" if the drug gets a European
green light, according to Le Berrigaud.
After
all the delays, the drug has patent protection until only 2017 in the
United States and 2014 in Europe, although Sanofi says it is "actively
pursuing" additional patent cover.
PRICING CONTROVERSY
The
drug's long history and existing use in leukemia poses a pricing
dilemma for Sanofi, prompting the French firm to take the unusual step
last year of pulling Campath off the market to stop its unauthorized use
in MS.
It will, however, still be available free of charge to established B-CLL patients through a special access scheme.
The
move gives Sanofi freedom to relaunch Lemtrada at higher price,
potentially putting it on a par with other new MS drugs that, in the
United States, cost $55,000-$60,000 a year.
In
terms of protecting shareholders' interest, it is a smart decision -
but some doctors are not impressed. The Lancet medical journal expressed
concern in an editorial last year and there is also worry among
transplant surgeons who have been using Campath off-label - for other
than its designated use - to help prevent rejection after operations.
Dr.
Roy Calne, a British organ transplantation pioneer, said using Campath
slashed the need for costly maintenance drugs and the alternative was 10
times more expensive.
Sanofi
CEO Chris Viehbacher, though, needs a decent return from Lemtrada to
help offset sales lost as older products face generic competition. He
knows the drug better than many: he was working at Wellcome back in the
1990s when the decision was made to discontinue its development.