Sanofi slams doors on Genzyme’s Cambridge, U.K., outfit

Posted under Blog, Companies, Diagnostics, downsizing, Funding, Genzyme, hub, massachusetts, Medical Devices, Medical Supply, Pharmaceuticals, Research and Development, Sanofi, Startups, Universities, Videos by Mark Hollmer

As part of an ongoing restructuring effort, Sanofi ($SNY) is shuttering Genzyme's Cambridge, U.K., R&D operation by the end of the year. The move comes after Sanofi's $20 billion acquisition of the biotechnology giant a year ago.

Up to 60 Genzyme employees will lose their positions, although some could be transferred elsewhere, Cambridge News reports. A Sanofi spokesperson confirmed that the site would shut down by December. However, some operations in Haverhill, U.K., and Oxford will continue.

Genzyme's U.S. operations are also feeling the pain from Sanofi's R&D restructuring. Sanofi acknowledged to FierceBiotech a few weeks ago that it was pursuing layoffs and moving positions in its Boston R&D wing, driven by "synergies that unfortunately make some positions redundant." No details yet as to specific job losses there. But Sanofi is building its Cambridge/Boston R&D operations into one of its most important globally. So while some Genzyme jobs are going, Sanofi is adding Massachusetts R&D and manufacturing positions.

In Europe, those efforts mean the company is consolidating its research operations to centers in Germany, France and Asia, the article notes. Jobs will likely grow in those locations. On the other hand, research groups in Italy and the Netherlands have been told "the bad news," which likely means more job losses in those locations.

- here's the story

Related Articles:
Sanofi trims staff at Genzyme R&D as it builds Boston hub
Sanofi sharpening budget ax in ongoing R&D restructuring effort
Sanofi moves deeper into Genzyme operations

Value Drivers Under the Influence – How Licensing and Key Events Affect Valuation

Posted under BIO CEO, BIO CEO & Investor Conference, biotech industry, Biotechnology Industry, Blog, Companies, Diagnostics, Events, Funding, Medical Devices, Medical Supply, Pharmaceuticals, Research and Development, Startups, Universities, Videos by biotechnow@bio.org (Biotechnology Industry Organization)

The Tuesday plenary luncheon at the 2012 BIO CEO & Investor Conference featured a panel of experts representing several perspectives on valuation.

The session opened with Ben Bonifant, Senior Vice President & Practice Area Leader at Campbell Alliance, presenting results from their Corporate Value Study, which was followed by a discussion examining the key value drivers for emerging companies. Bonifant moderated the panel discussion that featured:

• Rachel K. King, Chief Executive Officer, GlycoMimetics, Inc.
• Michael Margolis, RPh, Managing Director, Healthcare Investment Banking, ROTH Capital Partners
• Ronald C. Renaud, Jr., President & CEO, Idenix Pharmaceuticals
• Barbara Yanni, JD, LLM, CLP, Vice President and Chief Licensing Officer, Merck & Co.

The Corporate Value Study examined value changers in biopharma companies, specifically those in the $50M to $2B market cap range. Others areas examined included: valuations of business models; how do valuations vary; the worth of clinical events related to valuation and how licensing affects valuation. The study examined companies in the concept / pipeline phase, the pre-proof phase, post-proof phase and the commercialization phase. The study also took a look at the partnering model, independent model and operating model (which included co-promotion, independent and outsourced).

Of importance is the finding that none of the companies in the $1B category pursued a pure development model, all pursued a commercial model.

After the study results were discussed, the conversation quickly moved to market valuation. Barbara Yanni with Merck suggested the most important step for a potential investor is when the discussions begin. She stressed the importance of getting to know not only the company but the potential compound or drug. Michael Margolis with ROTH Capital Partners echoed that sentiment, encouraging companies to get a validating partnership early. “More and more investors are pleased when a company holds on to an asset to create value,” said Michael Margolis. Rachel King with GlycoMimetics followed up on Michael’s remarks, reminding the attendees, “Partnering strategy is critically informed by financing strategy.”

The topic quickly changed to the value and need for big pharma validation. In response, Ron Renauld with Idenix Pharmaceuticals stated, “There is a clear distinction between access to resources and validation. When data speaks for itself, big pharma validation is not necessary. Companies need to keep in mind that there’s pharma time and biotech time. Biotech time is much faster.” On the other hand, Rachel King expressed her favor for big pharma validation.

When the conversation looked to the future, Barbara Yanni predicted Hepatitis C and oncology might be the next “big thing” to catch with biopharma while Rachel King expressed interest in companion diagnostics. And Michael Margolis looked to the IPO Market. “It’s been a very challenging IPO market the last couple of years. It’s more a wait and see approach in IPO’s this year. We’ve seen a very active secondary market in IPO’s the past couple of weeks. The sector needs new public companies. As a banker, I want to see more public companies.”

Fireside Chat with Dr. Mikael Dolsten

Posted under BIO CEO, BIO CEO & Investor Conference, Blog, Companies, Diagnostics, Events, Funding, Medical Devices, Medical Supply, Pharmaceuticals, R&D, Research and Development, Startups, Universities, Videos by biotechnow@bio.org (Biotechnology Industry Organization)

Day two of the BIO CEO & Investor Conference kicked off with a Fireside Chat featuring Mikael Dolsten, MD, Phd, president, worldwide research & development from Pfizer, Inc and moderated by Mark Schoenebaum, senior biotechnology analyst with ISI Group. Speaking to a full room, Dr. Dolsten touched on Pfizer’s R&D priorities and their increased efforts to focus on investor capital return through a strong mixture of science, business and financial endeavors.

In focusing on R&D, Pfizer has chosen to move their resources to various biomedical hubs such as Cambridge, San Francisco, New York and La Jolla, recognizing that these regions present a strong environment for biomedical research and development. Through this refocus on the return of R&D and renewed effort to capitalize on partnerships, Dr. Dolsten let the audience know he is “excited about the future and structure of the company.”

When asked what Pfizer’s current scientific strengths included, Dr. Dolsten did not hesitate to mention a broad capability, including: oncology (recent FDA approvals have spearheaded this sector); vaccines; anti-infectious diseases; therapeutics; anti-nicotine (broadening their portfolio to pursue); brain diseases (mid to long term efforts) and cardiovascular disease and diabetes (an on-going effort). Dr. Dolsten reminded the crowd gathered that “science today moves across diseases.”

The session concluded with a lively Q&A discussion, largely driven by the audience asking Dr. Dolsten to comment on various Pfizer drugs in various states of approval. Upon conclusion, Dr. Dolsten wrapped with these parting words, “I think this is a great dialogue. In the end, the business of science needs to have a short and a long term plan. At Pfizer, the pipeline goal is to deliver near term and cover unmet needs long term. I remain optimistic that oncology will develop and see opportunities in science and healthcare as we learned from this past tough decade.”

“Alz” Well That Ends Well: The Beta-Amyloid Debate in Alzheimer’s Research

Posted under Alzheimer's, BIO CEO, Blog, Companies, Diagnostics, drug development, Events, Funding, Medical Devices, Medical Supply, Pharmaceuticals, research, Research and Development, Startups, Universities, Videos by biotechnow@bio.org (Biotechnology Industry Organization)

Researchers and clinicians alike believe there is substantial evidence to support the hypothesis that Alzheimer’s disease (AD) may be caused by deposition of amyloid beta-peptide (Abeta) in plaques in brain tissue. But drugs targeted towards the beta-amyloid have met with significant setbacks challenging whether the target is, in fact, real.

With several late stage drugs targeting beta-amyloid poised for market entry, a panel of opinion leaders in the treatment of Alzheimer’s and scientific industry specialists discussed the issue at the 2012 BIO CEO & Investor Conference.

Joshua Schimmer, managing director of biotechnology for Leerink Swann, moderated a panel that included:

• Ted T. Ashburn, MD, PhD, Project Head, Leukine® (sargramostim) and Elitek®/Fasturtec® (rasburicase), Sanofi Oncology
• Michael Gold, MS, MD, Vice President, Clinical Development & Chief Medical Officer, Allon Therapeutics Inc.
• Marc L. Gordon MD, Chief of Neurology, Associate Professor of Neurology and Psychiatry, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Hofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine
• Hyoung-Gon Lee, PhD, Assistant Professor, Pathology and Neurology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine

With all the questions surrounding the beta-amyloid process, Schimmer asked the panelists: “Why don’t we spend billions of dollars to figure out what ABP is doing?”

“It very well could be that this is the wrong target to be going after,” Ashburn replied. “I think with these [recent] failures there are really three things to think about. Is it target problem? Is it a compound problem? Or, is it a methodological problem?”

However, the panelists did agree that it’s very likely that amyloid has something to do with Alzheimer’s disease – it’s just a question of degree.

“Hopefully, in the not too distant future, we have drugs that can do something,” Ashburn said. “The doctor will hopefully have a repertoire of mechanisms to bring to bear as he or she does today with hypertension.”