AbbVie is now in a 5-year relationship with Johns Hopkins and Northwestern University. The goal? Advancing oncology R&D. The pharmaceutical giant will work with each university independently, providing funding for preclinical research and access to AbbVie’s existing research. Of course, in the spirit of reciprocation, AbbVie can exclusively claim any new discoveries as its own. Therapeutic areas of research will include breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancers, among others. This is not the first time AbbVie has tapped the power of academic institutions. They entered a multi-million dollar oncology research collaboration with University of Chicago last April. Arrangements like these have the potential to be a win-win-win for pharma, academia and patients alike. After all, sharing is caring.
The alchemists might have been aiming for something beyond wealth in attempting to turn base metals into gold. Recent research into the precious metal could lead to a new type of treatment for two of the deadliest cancers—i.e., pancreatic and ovarian—based on gold nanoparticles. Scientists already knew gold nanoparticles could be used to carry chemo drug molecules to tumors and to boost the effect of radiation on tumors, but new research shows that the gold nanoparticles interrupt cellular communication in the areas surrounding the pancreatic tumor. By butting in on the cell convo, the particles reduced cell proliferation and migration that usually occurs near these tumors. Added bonus—gold nanoparticles are not toxic to normal cells.
Remember when Snapchat turned down Facebook’s $3B offer? Everyone thought it was crazy. Well, maybe not everyone. Apparently Medivation was taking notes. Their rejection of Sanofi’s $9.3B proposal now has it cashing in a fat $14B check from Pfizer. Sure $11 or $12B may have done the job, but $14B in cash ensured there wouldn’t be any counter-offers. What was at stake? Medivation’s promising oncology pipeline which includes its (very successful) prostate cancer drug, XTANDI, which generated ~$2.2B over the past four quarters and has the potential to more than double that. Maybe the lashing Pfizer received that caused the Allergan break-up has made it want to start shopping local, a.k.a. make the US Treasury Dept. happy again.
Jeopardy champ slash chess master slash oncologist? In several Asian countries, Watson, the often anthropomorphized computer, is taking in the characteristics of specific oncology patients and recommending specific courses of treatment. After consuming (we refuse to say “reading”) millions of pages of medical text books and journal articles, Watson now advises on effective courses of cancer treatment for real live patients. Not that Watson’s advice is necessarily followed by the oncologists on staff but apparently they often agree. Can you imagine the argument that follows a disagreement between those two massive egos? One is a robot-like being, forged through years of hard work in a lab and the other is… well… a computer. Yeah, we went there.
Has risk reduction negatively impacted cancer drug developments? Dr. Richard Pazdur, head of the FDA’s office of oncology products, expressed this concern during the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting last week regarding the number of similar drugs in development, all focused on the PD-1 protein that cancerous tumors use to evade the immune system. While immunotherapy has shown promise even with the deadliest cancers, these therapies are currently priced in the $150k per year range, prompting not just “me-too” drugs, but me-too desires for the profits generated by these drugs. Many in the industry responded with the importance of PD-1 candidates for future combination therapies and the potential benefit to patients in the form of lower drug prices when there is competition in the marketplace.
A universal vaccine for cancer may actually be in sight. Can we all just take a minute to process this please? YAASS. An illness that wreaks havoc on countless lives could soon be a thing of history textbooks, due to genius efforts of a group of international researchers. The scientists have created a vaccine that essentially causes the immune system to recognize the tumor as a virus and attack it—a practice called cancer immunotherapy. The vaccine greatly reduced size of aggressive tumors in mice, and showed promising results in advanced stage patients—either reducing or halting tumor growth, and likely preventing relapse after tumor removal. The cherries atop this potential medical triumph are the relatively benign side effects and inexpensive vaccine production costs.
With so many Americans terrified of shots, the National Cancer Moonshot initiative may have trouble getting off the ground. A new study reveals only 40% of Americans hold a positive view of clinical trials, and just 4% of cancer patients enroll in a clinical trial annually. Yet, “when it comes to advancing cancer care, clinical research is the rocket fuel for better treatments, more accurate diagnoses and, ultimately, cures,” Dr. Jose Baselga, physician-in-chief and chief medical officer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Institute said. Concerns about side-effects, safety and out-of-pocket costs combined with the fear of receiving a placebo instead of an active treatment mean the cancer community needs to do some myth busting about clinical trials before advancing towards a cure.