– PF708-301 findings show comparable overall profiles of PF708 and Forteo®
– No imbalances in severity or incidence of adverse events
– Company is on track for submission of NDA in third quarter 2018
SAN DIEGO, CA, USA I May 14, 2018 I Pfenex Inc. (NYSE American: PFNX), a clinical-stage development and licensing biotechnology company focused on leveraging its Pfēnex Expression Technology® to improve protein therapies for unmet patient needs, today announced top-line results from its PF708-301 study, which showed comparable overall profiles between PF708 and Forteo® after 24 weeks of daily injection in osteoporosis patients. Pfenex expects to submit an New Drug Application (NDA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the third quarter of 2018.
“We are pleased with the results of the PF708-301 study, which show comparable overall profiles between PF708 and Forteo,” said Eef Schimmelpennink, Chief Executive Officer of Pfenex. “We expect that these results from the PF708-301 study, along with the previously announced bioequivalence findings from the PF708-101 study in healthy subjects, will support the PF708 NDA submission. We are on-track for submission to the FDA in the third quarter of 2018, with a potential commercial launch in the United States as early as the third quarter of 2019, subject, of course, to FDA approval of the application.”
PF708 is a teriparatide drug candidate that is being developed as a therapeutic equivalent to Forteo, which is approved and marketed by Eli Lilly for the treatment of osteoporosis patients at a high risk of fracture. PF708 is being developed pursuant to the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway in the United States and references Forteo as the Reference Listed Drug.
The PF708-301 study enrolled a total of 181 patients, with 90 patients receiving PF708 and 91 receiving Forteo. There were 82 patients who completed the study in the PF708 treatment group, compared with 81 patients in the Forteo treatment group. The primary study endpoint was anti-drug antibody (ADA) incidence after 24 weeks of drug treatment. The secondary study endpoints included mean percentage changes in lumbar-spine bone mineral density (BMD) and median percentage changes in bone turnover markers (BTM) after 24 weeks of drug treatment, as well as pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for up to four hours after the first dose. Safety study endpoints were incidences of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE).
There were two PF708-treated patients and two Forteo-treated patients that developed ADA during the study. These low rates of immunogenicity are consistent with historical Forteo results (~3%) in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. At Week 24, there were two ADA-positive findings for PF708 compared with none for Forteo, but the difference was not statistically significant. The ADA findings in the two PF708 patients were low in titer and resolved during follow-up. One of the two patients had in vitro neutralizing activity transiently detected at Week 4. However, pharmacological activity, as assessed by increases in BMD and BTM, was observed during the study for this patient. There were no apparent safety issues or abnormal serum calcium levels related to ADA or neutralizing antibody findings. These findings are consistent with observations in follow-on biologics and biosimilars approved in the United States, with almost all of the products demonstrating an ADA treatment difference of less than 5% in comparative patient studies. The overall ADA results are shown in Table 1, and individual titer results for all ADA-positive patients are shown in Table 2 (below).
PF708 and Forteo demonstrated comparable effects on lumbar-spine BMD, P1NP (N-terminal propeptide of type 1 procollagen), which is a marker of bone formation and CTX (cross-linked C-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen), which is a marker of bone resorption. There were no statistically significant differences in any of these parameters between PF708 and Forteo. The lumbar-spine BMD results are shown in Figure 1 (below), and BTM results are shown in Figure 2 (below).
There were no significant imbalances in AE incidences or severity profiles between PF708 and Forteo. Treatment-emergent AE and SAE profiles are shown in Table 3 (below), and the severity of treatment-emergent AEs is shown in Table 4 (below).
“The PF708-301 study assessed PF708 and Forteo across multiple endpoints in both female and male osteoporosis patients and showed comparable overall profiles. We believe the PF708-301 and PF708-101 study results meet the requirements for demonstrating clinical safety, effectiveness and bioequivalence,” said Hubert C. Chen, MD, Chief Medical and Scientific Officer of Pfenex. “We look forward to making our NDA submission to the FDA and engaging in discussion with the agency over the course of the review process.”
About Pfenex Inc.
Pfenex Inc. is a clinical-stage development and licensing biotechnology company focused on leveraging our Pfēnex Expression Technology® to improve protein therapies for unmet patient needs. Using the patented Pfēnex Expression Technology platform, the company has created an advanced pipeline of therapeutic equivalents, vaccines, biologics and biosimilars. The company’s lead product candidates are PF708, a therapeutic equivalent candidate to Forteo® (teriparatide) for the treatment of osteoporosis, and our novel anthrax vaccine candidates, Px563L and RPA563, funded through an advanced development contract with the U.S. government. In addition, Pfenex is developing hematology/oncology products, including PF743, a recombinant crisantaspase, and PF745, a recombinant crisantaspase with half-life extension technology, in collaboration with Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Furthermore, the company’s pipeline includes biosimilar candidates to Lucentis® and Neulasta®.
SOURCE: Pfenex
Post Views: 36
– PF708-301 findings show comparable overall profiles of PF708 and Forteo®
– No imbalances in severity or incidence of adverse events
– Company is on track for submission of NDA in third quarter 2018
SAN DIEGO, CA, USA I May 14, 2018 I Pfenex Inc. (NYSE American: PFNX), a clinical-stage development and licensing biotechnology company focused on leveraging its Pfēnex Expression Technology® to improve protein therapies for unmet patient needs, today announced top-line results from its PF708-301 study, which showed comparable overall profiles between PF708 and Forteo® after 24 weeks of daily injection in osteoporosis patients. Pfenex expects to submit an New Drug Application (NDA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the third quarter of 2018.
“We are pleased with the results of the PF708-301 study, which show comparable overall profiles between PF708 and Forteo,” said Eef Schimmelpennink, Chief Executive Officer of Pfenex. “We expect that these results from the PF708-301 study, along with the previously announced bioequivalence findings from the PF708-101 study in healthy subjects, will support the PF708 NDA submission. We are on-track for submission to the FDA in the third quarter of 2018, with a potential commercial launch in the United States as early as the third quarter of 2019, subject, of course, to FDA approval of the application.”
PF708 is a teriparatide drug candidate that is being developed as a therapeutic equivalent to Forteo, which is approved and marketed by Eli Lilly for the treatment of osteoporosis patients at a high risk of fracture. PF708 is being developed pursuant to the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway in the United States and references Forteo as the Reference Listed Drug.
The PF708-301 study enrolled a total of 181 patients, with 90 patients receiving PF708 and 91 receiving Forteo. There were 82 patients who completed the study in the PF708 treatment group, compared with 81 patients in the Forteo treatment group. The primary study endpoint was anti-drug antibody (ADA) incidence after 24 weeks of drug treatment. The secondary study endpoints included mean percentage changes in lumbar-spine bone mineral density (BMD) and median percentage changes in bone turnover markers (BTM) after 24 weeks of drug treatment, as well as pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for up to four hours after the first dose. Safety study endpoints were incidences of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE).
There were two PF708-treated patients and two Forteo-treated patients that developed ADA during the study. These low rates of immunogenicity are consistent with historical Forteo results (~3%) in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. At Week 24, there were two ADA-positive findings for PF708 compared with none for Forteo, but the difference was not statistically significant. The ADA findings in the two PF708 patients were low in titer and resolved during follow-up. One of the two patients had in vitro neutralizing activity transiently detected at Week 4. However, pharmacological activity, as assessed by increases in BMD and BTM, was observed during the study for this patient. There were no apparent safety issues or abnormal serum calcium levels related to ADA or neutralizing antibody findings. These findings are consistent with observations in follow-on biologics and biosimilars approved in the United States, with almost all of the products demonstrating an ADA treatment difference of less than 5% in comparative patient studies. The overall ADA results are shown in Table 1, and individual titer results for all ADA-positive patients are shown in Table 2 (below).
PF708 and Forteo demonstrated comparable effects on lumbar-spine BMD, P1NP (N-terminal propeptide of type 1 procollagen), which is a marker of bone formation and CTX (cross-linked C-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen), which is a marker of bone resorption. There were no statistically significant differences in any of these parameters between PF708 and Forteo. The lumbar-spine BMD results are shown in Figure 1 (below), and BTM results are shown in Figure 2 (below).
There were no significant imbalances in AE incidences or severity profiles between PF708 and Forteo. Treatment-emergent AE and SAE profiles are shown in Table 3 (below), and the severity of treatment-emergent AEs is shown in Table 4 (below).
“The PF708-301 study assessed PF708 and Forteo across multiple endpoints in both female and male osteoporosis patients and showed comparable overall profiles. We believe the PF708-301 and PF708-101 study results meet the requirements for demonstrating clinical safety, effectiveness and bioequivalence,” said Hubert C. Chen, MD, Chief Medical and Scientific Officer of Pfenex. “We look forward to making our NDA submission to the FDA and engaging in discussion with the agency over the course of the review process.”
About Pfenex Inc.
Pfenex Inc. is a clinical-stage development and licensing biotechnology company focused on leveraging our Pfēnex Expression Technology® to improve protein therapies for unmet patient needs. Using the patented Pfēnex Expression Technology platform, the company has created an advanced pipeline of therapeutic equivalents, vaccines, biologics and biosimilars. The company’s lead product candidates are PF708, a therapeutic equivalent candidate to Forteo® (teriparatide) for the treatment of osteoporosis, and our novel anthrax vaccine candidates, Px563L and RPA563, funded through an advanced development contract with the U.S. government. In addition, Pfenex is developing hematology/oncology products, including PF743, a recombinant crisantaspase, and PF745, a recombinant crisantaspase with half-life extension technology, in collaboration with Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Furthermore, the company’s pipeline includes biosimilar candidates to Lucentis® and Neulasta®.
SOURCE: Pfenex
Post Views: 36
