|
|
|
|
||
Re: Aclaris??? Who are they and why are they infringing on CNCE's patent?/LFLExcerpt from you post of Aclaris' PR: "We are extremely pleased with the continued expansion of the patent portfolio that we exclusively licensed from Columbia University," said Dr. Neal Walker, President and Chief Executive Officer of Aclaris. "We believe access to this patent portfolio is necessary for anyone intending to commercialize ruxolitinib,... Excerpt from CNCE 2018 10K - COMPETITION "Many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have begun to cover deuterated analogs of their product candidates in patent applications and may develop these deuterated compounds. Some of these pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, nonclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining marketing approvals and marketing approved products than we do. In some cases, these competitors may be interested in developing deuterated compounds that we may be interested in developing for ourselves. Our competitors may succeed in obtaining patents that dominate our products, preventing our operational freedom. In addition, these competitors may enter into collaborative arrangements or business combinations that result in their ability to research and develop deuterated compounds more effectively than us. Our potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations. CTP-543 CTP-543 is a deuterated analog of ruxolitinib, which is being developed for the treatment of moderate-to-severe alopecia areata, an autoimmune disease that results in partial or complete loss of hair on the scalp and body. If CTP-543 receives marketing approval for this indication, it may face competition from a number of other product candidates that are being studied for alopecia areata. Ruxolitinib is a Janus kinase, or JAK, inhibitor. A number of companies are pursuing development of oral JAK inhibitors with a range of subtype selectivities for the treatment of alopecia areata, including Aclaris Therapeutics, Eli Lilly and Pfizer." I had seen this disclosure before in CNCE's 10K wrt Aclaris as a competitor, but the recent PR you posted is news to me. CNCE's disclosures I copied above indicate they were aware of this possibility. Yahoo's profile for Aclaris indicates they are developing ATI-501 and ATI-502 Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, which are in Phase II clinical trials for alopecia areata (AA) and other dermatological indications. Aclaris latest PR implies that they now have a patent license that allows them to develop D-Ruxo based upon Columbia U's research and patents. Does this patent infringe on CNCE's? I don't know, but there may be more than one way to deuterate Ruxo? I would think that INCY would have it covered by their patent that uses the shotgun approach of all of the permutations and combinations. First, I would say that CNCE is way ahead of any competitor deuterating Ruxo in both proven production and in clinical trials. Would ACRS' version have the same safety & efficacy as CNCE's? This appears to create a triangle of possible litigation between CNCE, INCY and ACRS. I would say we need to have CNCE address this latest development and explain how we are protected. I see CNCE is presenting on 4/25 at the 2019 World Congress for Hair Research Annual Meeting in Barcelona. I doubt this will be addressed then. So we will probably have to wait for the quarterly report in May - most likely during the conference call. Otherwise, our only other source is IR. Red |
return to message board, top of board |
Msg # | Subject | Author | Recs | Date Posted |
1450 | Re: Aclaris??? Who are they and why are they infringing on CNCE's patent?/LFL | DFA | 4 | 4/25/2019 9:22:10 AM |