SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Biotech / MedicalARADIGM CORP. ARDM


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: keokalani'nui who wrote (202)5/5/2004 8:35:28 PM
From: Area51
   of 255
 
Hi Wilder,

Sorry I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. I was only trying to understand your perspective, as you are obviously more knowledgeable than I on the science.

My perspective (which may very well be seriously flawed) is that if the ARDM product can be marketed for type 2 diabetes, that it would still be a compelling long term investment now. So I was trying to get any insight you had on whether or not it was likely or unlikely that the product would be marketable for type 2 diabetes.

Best Regards,
Area51

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Area51 who wrote (203)5/5/2004 10:53:42 PM
From: keokalani'nui
   of 255
 
There is just no way of knowing. I'm convinced not even novo knows. But the lead suspect, if proven, will imo be the end of the drug.

You can be also sure that it's in trouble since only a few more months and they would have had the 24-mo safety data, but they stopped the trial anyway. Would fda require 24-month data for a T2-only NDA?

You are right about the payoff however.

I don't know so much about science, btw. Could save you or make you some money knowing that. ;-)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: keokalani'nui who wrote (204)5/26/2004 11:45:40 AM
From: tuck
   of 255
 
Recent freebie editorial on inhaled insulin:

bmj.bmjjournals.com

Notable for the sentence:

"Formation of anti-insulin antibodies is higher with inhaled insulin, and although this is dismissed as not affecting insulin requirement over time, older diabetologists will remember the drive to reduce insulin antibody formation, with the fears that antibodies delay and render unpredictable insulin absorption and even that antibody-antigen complexes may increase risk of microvascular disease."

I think this will torpedo Exubera, too, unless long term study data that does not reflect the Novo/Aradigm experience is also submitted. I hear that relevant study data was submitted by Pfizer to EMEA, but I thought these long term studies were still ongoing.

Cheers, Tuck

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: tuck who wrote (205)5/26/2004 4:14:43 PM
From: keokalani'nui
   of 255
 
Nice, very nice, work. Might see if there is a footnote to that quote.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: keokalani'nui who wrote (197)6/7/2004 2:56:58 PM
From: tuck
   of 255
 
INHL' studies continue to show no effect, but night time glucose levels not measured? Would the FDA ask for such data? Two year results coming soon, should be interesting . . .

Message 20200796

Cheers, Tuck

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: tuck who wrote (207)6/7/2004 4:07:53 PM
From: keokalani'nui
   of 255
 
tuck, apparently7 exubera shared l/t safety and efficacy at ADA today. I didn't focus on it and probably won't since I got no dog in the fight.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: rkrw who wrote (196)6/9/2004 3:21:01 PM
From: tuck
   of 255
 
It would appear that night time glucose levels, which derailed AERx, weren't measured in Exubera long term safety studies. From this year's ADA meeting:

>>Sustained Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Inhaled Insulin during 4 Years of Continuous Therapy

Abstract Information
Abstract Number: 486-P
Authors: JAY SKYLER, FOR THE EXUBERA® PHASE II STUDY GROUP
Institution: Miami, FL
Results: Inhaled insulin has shown encouraging efficacy and safety data in short-term clinical trials. This study examined whether these favorable results are maintained in the long term. Continued open-label inhaled insulin therapy was offered to patients with diabetes who had completed any of three 3-month, randomized, controlled clinical trials (type 1, insulin-treated type 2 or type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on oral agents [OAs]). A total of 204 patients entered the extension, with 159 electing to stay on inhaled insulin (INH) or switch from comparator treatments and 89 patients having received at least 4 years of INH therapy. A small group of patients (n=23) on OAs or subcutaneous insulin was followed for up to 2 years as well. Mean (± SD) HbAì1cí was 8.23 ± 1.21% after 4 years in INH patients compared with 8.71 ± 1.49% at the start of INH treatment. Inhaled insulin dose increased slightly from 0.15 mg/kg after 3 months of treatment to 0.18 mg/kg after 4 years. The rate of overall hypoglycemia decreased from 2.58 episodes/subject month (first 4 weeks of INH treatment) to 1.50 after 4 years (final 6 months). Annualized changes in the lung function parameters FEVì1í and DLìCOí (mean ± SE) in INH patients over 4 years were -0.057 ± 0.004 L/yr and -0.376 ± 0.067 mL/min/mmHg/yr, respectively. Corresponding declines in non-INH patients (based on 2-year data only) were -0.071 ± 0.023 L/yr and -0.673 ± 0.423 mL/min/mmHg/yr, respectively. In conclusion, glycemic control and pulmonary function are well maintained during long-term continuous inhaled insulin therapy.<<

So my question is, why has ARDM/Novo made this measurement while NKTR and partners have not? Will the FDA want this parameter? I would think that if the former thought it was appropriate to delay development while investigating this issue, that the FDA would surely want to look at it from all comers. I wonder what others are thinking. FBR downgraded NKTR today, but I can't find the rationale. The results appear pretty good, absent the above measurement.

Thanks for any thoughts from anyone on this.

Cheers, Tuck

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: tuck who wrote (209)6/10/2004 1:24:55 PM
From: tuck
   of 255
 
Thanks to deeno for this ML report which mentions for the first time in the analytical domain (that I have seen) the ARDM/Novo experience as a potential problem for Exubera.

Message 20210503

Cheers, Tuck

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: rkrw who wrote (196)8/10/2004 3:28:44 PM
From: tuck
   of 255
 
>>CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 10, 2004--Alkermes, Inc. (Nasdaq: ALKS - News) announced today that Eli Lilly and Company ("Lilly") has made a positive product decision and will proceed with significant investment for the further development of an inhaled formulation of insulin. The decision follows the successful execution of several critical steps: the completion and analysis of data from a Phase 2 study; the achievement of commercial manufacturing powder production scale-up; and the development and testing of the commercial pulmonary insulin inhaler system. Development activities will include both clinical trials and additional manufacturing activities for the inhaler system and the production facility.

A recently completed Phase 2 clinical trial for inhaled insulin using Alkermes' AIR® technology showed that patients with type 1 diabetes achieved glycemic control levels similar to injected insulin. The trial was a multi-center, cross-over design study with 120 patients with type 1 diabetes receiving an inhaled formulation of insulin using AIR technology for a three-month period. Inhaled insulin had a rapid onset of action and was well tolerated with adverse events similar in both treatment arms.

"We're delighted that the strength of the clinical data and our achievement of commercialization milestones provided the basis of the decision by Lilly to move forward with further development for inhaled insulin," said Elliot Ehrich, M.D., Chief Medical Officer at Alkermes. "We look forward to initiating additional clinical studies that will bring us another step closer to developing an important new treatment for the growing number of people living with diabetes."

The inhaled insulin delivery system is based on Alkermes' AIR pulmonary drug delivery technology, which uses a small, easy-to-use, inhaler designed to provide drug delivery for a wide range of drug doses. Alkermes and Lilly have collaborated on the inhaled insulin program since 2001 to develop an innovative treatment option for people with diabetes.

About Diabetes

Diabetes is a group of diseases characterized by high levels of blood glucose resulting from defects in insulin production, insulin action, or both. According to the American Diabetes Association ("ADA"), diabetes can be associated with serious complications and premature death, but people with diabetes can take steps to control the disease and lower the risk of complications (Source ADA). Additionally, the World Health Organization ("WHO") lists diabetes as one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. Approximately 193 million people around the world have diabetes, and this number is expected to double to 330 million by the year 2025 (Source International Diabetes Federation). <<

There is no thread for Alkermes, according to the lame SI search engine. NKTR recently got creamed by EMEA "not licensable" letter a few days ago. Not sure what the specific concerns were, but one wonders if the antibody issue is haunting them, too. Will Lilly and Alkermes really escape? NKTR is up 10%, ALKS 20% . . . and ARDM is still in its hospital bed.

Cheers, Tuck

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: tuck who wrote (211)8/24/2004 10:52:05 AM
From: tuck
   of 255
 
[Intrasubject variability of inhaled insulin in type 1 diabetes: a comparison with subcutaneous insulin.]

>>Diabetes Technol Ther. 2004 Aug;6(4):466-72.

Intrasubject variability of inhaled insulin in type 1 diabetes: a comparison with subcutaneous insulin.

Kapitza C, Hompesch M, Scharling B, Heise T.

Profil Institute for Metabolic Research, Neuss, Germany.

We compared intrasubject variability of insulin and glucose profiles after a standardized meal between insulin inhaled via the AERx((R)) insulin Diabetes Management System (AERx iDMS, Aradigm Corp., Hayward, CA) and given as a subcutaneous injection. In this single-center, parallel, randomized, open-labeled trial, 17 male, non-smoking patients with type 1 diabetes (mean age, 27.7 years; body mass index, 23.4 kg/m(2)) received a fixed, individualized dose of human insulin, on four treatment days followed by an individualized breakfast, administered either by inhalation via AERx iDMS (n = 9) or by subcutaneous injection. Serum insulin and serum glucose levels were determined at regular intervals for 6 h postdose. Intrasubject variability was expressed as coefficient of variation. No statistically significant differences in intrasubject variability were observed between the treatments for the areas under the insulin curves for 0-6 h [27% vs. 19% (inhaled insulin vs. subcutaneous)] and areas under the glucose curves 0-6 h (30% vs. 23%). Intrasubject variability values for insulin half-life, terminal elimination rate constant, and mean residence time were significantly less in the inhaled insulin group compared with the subcutaneous insulin group (P = 0.01-0.02). Only one potentially trial product-related adverse event (an audible wheeze) was reported, and no clinically relevant changes in pulmonary function were detected. The intrasubject variability was comparable between patients receiving inhaled insulin and subcutaneous insulin, thereby confirming the reproducibility of administering insulin via AERx iDMS. Inhaled insulin was well tolerated and is a feasible alternative to subcutaneous insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes.<<

Nothing major here . . .

Cheers, Tuck

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10