throbber
FRESH FROM THE PIPELINE
`Aflibercept
`
`Michael W Stewart, Seden Grippon and Peter Kirkpatrick
`
`In November 2011, aflibercept
`(Eylea; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals),
`a recombinant fusion protein that binds
`to members of the vascular endothelial
`growth factor family, was approved by
`the US Food and Drug Administration
`(FDA) for the treatment of patients
`with neovascular age-related macular
`degeneration.
`
`Age-related macular degeneration (AMD)
`is the leading cause of blindness among the
`• The disorder
`elderly in the developed world1
`is classified into two forms: non-neovascular
`(dry) AMD and neovascular (wet) AMD.
`The neovascular form involves abnormal
`neovascularization under the macula (the
`central part of the retina), which leads to
`leakage of blood or serum that damages the
`macula and causes deterioration in sight.
`Although only -10% of patients with AMD
`have the neovascular form, it accounts for
`-90% of the severe loss ofvision1
`•
`Treatment strategies for neovascular
`AMD have progressed substantially
`in the past decade or so, from thermal
`laser photocoagulation to specific
`pharmacotherapies, in particular those that
`inhibit vascular endothelial growth factor
`(VEGF), which is important in choroidal
`neovascularization (CNV)' . In 2000,
`photodynamic therapy with verteporfin
`(Visudyne; QLT/Novartis), which causes
`selective destruction of CNV lesions,
`became the first FDA-approved treatment for
`neovascular AMD. However, in most patients
`photocoagulation and photodynamic therapy
`only slow the deterioration in vision2
`
`•
`
`Basis of discovery
`VEGF, which acts via two receptor tyrosine
`kinases, VEGFRl and VEGFR2, on the
`surface of endothelial cells, has a key role in
`physiological angiogenesis and pathological
`• Recognition of the importance
`angiogenesis 1
`ofVEGF in cancer and pathological ocular
`neovascularization led to the development
`of various strategies to inhibit VEGF
`signalling 1
`•
`Pegaptanib (Macugen; Eyetech), an
`aptamer that targets the VEGF 165 isoform,
`was approved by the FDA for neovascular
`AMD in 2004. However, its effectiveness
`
`in preventing deterioration of vision is not
`as great as that of ranibizumab (Lucentis;
`Genentech/Roche), a recombinant
`VEGF-specific antibody fragment that
`was approved by the FDA for neovascular
`AMD in 2006 following trials showing that
`it not only maintained visual acuity in more
`than 90% of patients but also improved it
`in around a third of patients2
`• In addition,
`bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech/Roche),
`a monoclonal VEGF-specific antibody
`that has been developed and approved for
`the treatment of various cancers, has been
`widely used off-label for the treatment
`of neovascular AMD following studies
`indicating its effectiveness, largely owing
`to its lower cost than ranibizumab 1
`•
`Another strategy that has been developed
`to block the activity of cytokines such as
`VEGF is to prevent them from binding to
`their normal receptors by administering
`soluble decoy receptors that are constructed
`by fusing binding domains of the normal
`receptors to an immunoglobulin constant
`• Aflibercept (previously known as
`region3
`VEGF-Trap) was developed by optimizing
`the pharmacokinetic properties of such
`fusion proteins to improve their in vivo
`anticancer activity' . In particular, these
`efforts focused on selecting portions of
`the extracellular domains of VEGFRl and
`VEGFR2 that were anticipated to lead to
`fusion proteins with reduced propensity
`for nonspecific interactions with the
`extracellular matrix, as well as improved
`binding potency3
`
`•
`
`Drug properties
`Aflibercept is a recombinant fusion protein
`that consists of portions of human VEGFRl
`and VEGFR2 extracellular domains fused to
`the Fe portion of human immunoglobulin G 1
`(REFS 3.4]. It binds strongly to VEGF and
`placental growth factor, and thereby inhibits
`the binding and activation of the cognate
`VEGFRs3
`
`·".
`
`Clinical data
`The efficacy and safety of a±libercept
`(administered by intravitreal injection)
`were assessed in two randomized,
`double-masked, active-controlled trials
`in patients with wet AMD4
`• A total of
`
`NEWS & ANALYSIS
`
`2,412 patients were treated and evaluable
`for efficacy in the two trials (known as
`VIEW! and VIEW2)". In each of these
`trials, patients were randomly assigned in
`a 1: 1: 1: 1 ratio to one of the following four
`treatment regimens: a±libercept at a dose of
`2 mg administered every 8 weeks, following
`three initial monthly doses; aflibercept at a
`dose of 2 mg administered every 4 weeks;
`a±libercept at a dose of 0.5 mg administered
`every 4 weeks; and ranibizumab at a dose of
`0.5 mg administered every 4 weeks' . In both
`trials, the primary efficacy end point was
`the proportion of patients who maintained
`vision, defined as losing fewer than 15 letters
`of best corrected visual acuity (BVCA)
`at 52 weeks compared with the baseline•.
`Secondary end points included the mean
`change in BVCA as measured by the ETD RS
`(Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy
`Study) score from the baseline".
`After 52 weeks, the efficacy results for
`the two groups that received a±libercept at the
`2 mg dose were clinically equivalent to those
`from the ranibizumab group". Of the patients
`who received 2 mg aflibercept every 8 weeks
`(after the initial three monthly doses),
`the proportions that maintained visual acuity
`were 94% in VIEW! and 95% in VIEW2
`[REF 4]. Of the patients who received 2 mg
`atlibercept every 4 weeks, the proportions
`that maintained visual acuity were 95% in
`VIEW! and 95% in VIEW2 [REF. 4] . Of the
`patients who received ranibizumab, 94%
`maintained visual acuity in VIEW!,
`and 95% maintained visual acuity in
`VIEW2 [REF 4).
`For the secondary end point of mean
`change in BVCA, of the patients who
`received 2 mg aflibercept every 8 weeks
`a±ter three initial monthly doses, the mean
`changes were 7.9 in VIEW! and 8.9 in
`VIEW2 [REF 4). The mean changes for the
`groups that received 2 mg a±libercept every
`4 weeks were 10.9 in VIEW! and 7.6 in
`VIEW2, and for the groups that received
`ranibizumab the mean changes were 8.1
`in VIEW! and 9.4 in VIEW2 [REF 4].
`
`Indications
`Aflibercept is approved by the FDA for
`the treatment of patients with neovascular
`(wet) AMD".
`
`~
`
`NATURE REVIEWS I DRUG DISCOVERY
`
`VOLUM E 11 I APRIL 20 12 I 269
`
`© 2012 Macmilla n Publishers Limited . All rights reserved
`
`Regeneron Exhibit 1022.001
`
`

`

`NEWS & ANALYSIS
`
`ANALYSIS I AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION
`
`.. Analysing issues in the treatment of AMD is
`Michael W Stewart, M.D., Chair, Department
`of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Mayo School
`of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
`
`The recent approval of atlibercept provides
`ophthalmologists and patients with a third
`excellent anti-VEGF therapy for AMD.
`Whereas bevacizumab was developed for
`the treatment of advanced solid tumours
`and has been used off-label for AMD and
`other ophthalmic disorders, ranibizumab
`was developed exclusively for ophthalmic
`conditions. The pivotal Phase III trials for
`ranibizumab2 established monthly injections
`as the standard against which other drugs and
`dosing regimens have since been compared.
`Despite this, many physicians have preferred
`low-cost bevacizumab (-US$50 per dose)
`over the higher-cost ranibizumab (-$1,950
`per dose) for the initial treatment of AMD,
`although only recently has bevacizumab
`(administered monthly) been shown to
`produce improvements in vision that are
`comparable to ranibizumab5
`The year 1 results of the Phase III VIEW
`trials for aflibercept demonstrated for the
`first time that injections of an anti-VEGF
`drug every 8 weeks (aflibercept; 2 mg)
`improve vision comparably to ranibizumab
`administered every 4 weeks<. For patients
`treated according to the labelling guidelines
`(based on the Phase III trial protocols), those
`
`•
`
`receiving a±libercept require fewer office
`visits and injections than those receiving
`ranibizwnab (7 versus 12) during the first year.
`To reduce the burden of clinic visits
`and intravitreal injections, however, most
`physicians use 'treat and observe' or 'treat
`and extend' strategies. Although the VIEW
`trials did not strictly evaluate either of these
`strategies, in the second year a 'treat and
`observe' strategy with a 3-month cap (that
`required injection) was used. During year 2,
`the developer Regeneron has reported that
`both ranibizumab and a±libercept performed
`well, as patients receiving either drug lost
`an average of only 0.8 letters of visual acuity.
`Compared with ranibizumab, aflibercept
`showed slightly better durability for each group
`studied, suggesting that the duration between
`injections for a±libercept could be extended
`by an additional 2-4 weeks compared with
`ranibizwnab. However, doubling the injection
`intervals, as suggested by the year 1 result,
`is probably not achievable for most patients.
`For patients treated according to the
`VIEW protocols, a±libercept ( -$1,850 per
`dose) reduces costs and patient visits by
`42% compared with ranibizumab. For those
`on 'treat and observe' or 'treat and extend'
`regimens, the savings will be considerably
`lower. As physicians gain experience with
`aflibercept, it is possible that many could
`switch from ranibizumab for cases when a
`high-affinity anti-VEGF drug is indicated.
`
`Box 11 Market for age-related macular degeneration
`
`Analysing the market for therapies for wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is Seden
`Grippon, IMS Health, London, UK.
`
`The global market for wet AMD therapies is currently worth -US$4 billion annually, according to data
`from IMS Health. This market is dominated by ranibizumab (Lucent is; Genentech/Roche), an antibody
`fragment specific for vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which accounts for-98% of sales.
`Aflibercept (Eylea, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals), a fusion protein that also targets VEGF, was
`launched into this market in the United States in November 2011, following its approval by the
`US Food and Drug Administration. In Europe, aflibercept is at the preregistration phase. Its less
`frequent dosing compared with Lucent is (see main text) appears to be perceived by physicians as
`a moderate advantage, and analysts predict that its uptake will be robust, potentially taking more
`than half of Lucentis's market share in the next 3 years; in February 2012, the number of patients
`on Eylea had grown by 50% over the previous 6weeks, and with rapid uptake it has been predicted
`that US sales alone may reach $1 billion in 2016 (Nadeau, P. & Bishop, N. Cowen. Company Report on
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. 9 February 2012; Meacham, G. eta!. JP Morgan Report on Regeneron
`Pharmaceuticals. 13 February 2012). Aflibercept is also in development for other ophthalmic
`indications, including diabetic macular oedema, central retinal vein occlusion, myopic choroidal
`neovascularization and branch retinal vein occlusion. Finally, as only-30% of patients with wet AMD
`experience a significant improvement in vision with anti-VEGF therapy, alternative strategies that
`are currently being investigated in Phase II trials have a high chance of physician uptake if successful.
`These strategies include: E10030 (developed byOphthotech), which is an aptamer that targets
`platelet-derived growth factor B; hl-conl (developed by Iconic Therapeutics), which is a fusion protein
`that targets tissue factor; and mesenchymal precursor cells (developed by Mesoblast).
`
`Despite the savings resulting from less
`frequent a±libercept therapy, however,
`monthly bevacizumab remains the less
`expensive alternative. When choosing an
`anti-VEGF drug, physicians and patients
`will need to consider the trade-offs between
`lower costs (bevacizumab) versus less
`frequent visits and injections (a±libercept).
`The pivotal AMD trials for ranibizumab
`and a±libercept all showed that regularly
`administered anti-VEGF injections improve
`visual acuity by 8-11 letters over the study
`period, leading many physicians to believe that
`anti-VEGF monotherapy has hit an efficacy
`'ceiling'. Future anti-VEGF agents, such as the
`designed ankyrin repeat protein (DARPin)
`MP0112 (which has completed Phase I/II
`trials), will need to be differentiated from
`current drugs based on improved durability.
`Improving the efficacy of AMD treatment
`by reducing the size of the neovascular
`complex, thereby improving the anatomy and
`function of the photoreceptors, retinal pigment
`epithelium and choriocapillaris, will probably
`require combination drug therapy. Several
`drugs that inhibit the actions of molecules that
`are crucial to the growth of the neovascular
`complex -
`including integrins, complement
`component 5 and platelet-derived growth
`factor - are in various stages of development.
`Effective combination therapy, however,
`is still several years away. Given the crucial role
`ofVEGF in wet AMD and the demonstrated
`efficacy of the currently available drugs,
`anti-VEGF therapy will remain an important
`component of AMD therapy for many years.
`
`Michael W Stewart is at the Department of
`Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Mayo School of Medicine,
`Jacksonville, Florida 32224, US4.
`Seden Grippon is at IMS Health, 7 Harewood Avenue,
`London NW/ 6JB, UK.
`Peter Kirkpatrick is at Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.
`
`e-mails: Stewart.Michael@mauo.edu·
`SGrippon@imsca.com· p.kirkpatrick@nature.com
`
`doi: I0.1038/nrd3700
`
`1. Stewart, M. W. The expanding role of vascular
`endothelial growth factor inhibitors in ophthalmology.
`Mayo Clin. Proc. 87, 77-88 (2012).
`2. Narayanan , R. et al. Ranibizumab. Nature Rev. Drug
`Discov 5, 815-816 (2006).
`3. Holash J. et al. VEGF-Trap: a VEGF blocker with potent
`antitumor effects. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99,
`11393-11398 (2002).
`4. US Food and Drug Administration. FDA labeling
`information - Eylea. FDA website lonline].
`http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda docs/
`label/2011/1253871bl.pdf (201 1 ).
`5. Martin, D. F. et al. Ranibizumab and bevacizumab
`for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
`N. Engl. J. Med. 364, 1897-1908 (2011).
`
`Competing financial interests
`The authors declare competing financial interests: see Web
`version for details.
`
`270 I APRI L 20 12 1 VO LUME 11
`
`www.natu re .com/rev iews/d rugdisc
`
`© 2012 Macmilla n Publishers Limited . All rights reserved
`
`Regeneron Exhibit 1022.002
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket