A silver lining for Endocyte

May 2, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The news this morning couldn’t have been worse for Endocyte Inc.

But if it had to come, the timing couldn’t have been better.

The West Lafayette-based drug development firm halted a large clinical trial of its leading cancer drug, vintafolide, for women with ovarian cancer. That sent its stock plunging more than 60 percent.

But the bad news on vintafolide didn’t come until AFTER the drug was given the green light for a market launch by the key regulatory panel in Europe on March 21.

And not until AFTER vintafolide showed promise as a lung cancer drug, also in late-March.

And not until AFTER Endocyte used the investor euphoria that followed those two positive announcements to raise an additional $101.8 million in an April stock offering.

So while CEO Ron Ellis, CFO Mike Sherman and the rest of the team at Endocyte must have felt sick to their stomachs when they read an independent statistical analysis that said vintafolide wasn’t working in ovarian cancer patients, they can at least feel good that the latest stock leaves them a $233 million pile of cash they can use to develop other drugs.

Since the company had a burn rate last year of $83 million (part of which was funded by Merck & Co. Inc., which has purchased the rights to vintafolide), that money should last a while.

Of course, they need it to, because bringing drugs to market is not a quick business. Endocyte was founded by Purdue University chemist Phillip Low in 1995—and it still has no drugs on the market.

And as Endocyte’s see-saw fortunes in just the past six weeks prove, drug development is a brutally risky business.

"Given the set-up, we see this as an overwhelmingly worst-case scenario," wrote Baird Equity Research analyst Christopher Raymond, in a note to investors Friday morning. He added, "We see a long road back to credibility."

Endocyte and Merck are still reviewing the data on vintafolide as an ovarian cancer treatment, so there’s an outside chance the drug might be resurrected in that therapeutic area. But it’s doubtful. The recommendation to halt the Phase 3 clinical trial came from the Data Safety Monitoring Board based on its analysis of progression-free survival in patients. If vintafolide isn’t helping cancer patients live cancer-free longer, then there’s little hope for it.

But vintafolide could still turn out to be effective as a lung cancer drug. And Merck would fund the development of vintafolide on that, too.

The truly worst-case scenario for Endocyte would be for Merck to pull out entirely. That would leave Endocyte with only drugs that are in Phase 1 clinical trials, and probably years to go before reaching the market.

But whatever happens, Endocyte will now spend its cash hoard on its other drugs in development. Those include EC1169, which could treat prostate cancer patients, and EC1456, which some have billed as a better version of vintafolide.

“We are in a strong financial position to continue to advance our promising clinical programs,” Ellis said in a press release this morning.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Gay marriage is coming, whether or not these bigots and zealots like it or not. We must work to ensure future generations remember the likes of Greg Zoeller like they do the racists of our past...in shame.

  2. Perhaps a diagram of all the network connections of all politicians to their supporters and those who are elite/wealthy and how they have voted on bills that may have benefited their supporters. The truth may hurt, but there are no non-disclosures in government.

  3. I'm sure these lawyers were having problems coming up with any non-religious reason to ban same-sex marriage. I've asked proponents of this ban the question many times and the only answers I have received were religious reasons. Quite often the reason had to do with marriage to a pet or marriage between a group even though those have nothing at all to do with this. I'm looking forward to less discrimination in our state soon!

  4. They never let go of the "make babies" argument. It fails instantaneously because a considerable percentage of heterosexual marriages don't produce any children either. Although if someone wants to pass a law that any couple, heterosexual or homosexual, cannot be legally married (and therefore not utilize all legal, financial, and tax benefits that come with it) until they have produced a biological child, that would be fun to see as a spectator. "All this is a reflection of biology," Fisher answered. "Men and women make babies, same-sex couples do not... we have to have a mechanism to regulate that, and marriage is that mechanism." The civil contract called marriage does NOTHING to regulate babymaking, whether purposefully or accidental. These conservatives really need to understand that sex education and access to birth control do far more to regulate babymaking in this country. Moreover, last I checked, same-sex couples can make babies in a variety of ways, and none of them are by accident. Same-sex couples often foster and adopt the children produced by the many accidental pregnancies from mixed-sex couples who have failed at self-regulating their babymaking capabilities.

  5. Every parent I know with kids from 6 -12 has 98.3 on its car radio all the time!! Even when my daughter isn't in the car I sometimes forget to change stations. Not everybody wants to pay for satellite radio. This will be a huge disappointment to my 9 year old. And to me - there's so many songs on the radio that I don't want her listening to.

ADVERTISEMENT