Agenus, Glaxo: Sizing Up The Potential For The RTS,S Malaria Vaccine

 | Oct 10, 2013 12:33AM ET

Putting Malaria Vaccine Results in Perspective for Agenus
Glaxo (GSK) has just released interim (18 month) July 17, 2013 for a more detailed description of my reasoning.

My view that Prophage has a reasonable chance for success has been strongly attacked. However, I am encouraged that the National Cancer Institute, not Agenus, is funding a Phase II trial in recurrent glioblastoma that potentially could be the basis for registration. I believe that this is the largest brain cancer trial ever funded by NCI and could cost on the order of $20 to $25 million. I presume that NCI saw something interesting in the product and previous data that encouraged them to make such a huge commitment.

Results of Phase III Trial of RTS,S
New Phase III interim data on Glaxo’s RTS,S malaria vaccine was presented at the Multilateral Initiative on Malaria Pan African Conference in Durban, South Africa. The presentation was titled, “Efficacy of RTS,S/AS01 vaccine candidate against malaria in African infants and children 18 months post-primary vaccination series: a Phase 3 randomized, double-blind controlled trial”. At this point in time, I can only report results as they were stated in the Glaxo (GSK) press release. Detail was lacking and the presentation was confusing in parts.
The Phase III trial was analyzed for two different age groups; children aged 5 to 17 months and infants aged six to ten weeks. Children in each group were given either RTS,S or a control vaccine. Results from this trial were previously reported after one year of follow-up. This paper presented 18 months follow-up data from the same trial.

The paper stated that at 18 months there were 46% fewer cases of clinical malaria in the 5 to 17 month age group. It went on to conclude that for every 1000 children vaccinated over an 18 month period, an average of 941 cases of clinical malaria were prevented. (The study somehow took into account that some children contact more than one case of malaria in that time frame.) The study estimated that 21 cases of severe malaria were prevented for every 1000 children vaccinated over this 18 month period and malaria caused hospitalizations were reduced by 42%.

In the six to ten weeks group (infants), there were 444 clinical cases of malaria prevented for every 1000 infants vaccinated. The reduction in severe malaria cases was 15% and the reduction in hospitalizations was 17%. The reduction in severe malaria cases and malaria hospitalizations was statistically significant in the 5 month to 17 month age group but was not statistically significant in the six to ten weeks age group.

Vaccine efficacy appears to decline over time. The results at one year showed that reduction in clinical malaria in the 5 to 17 month age group was 56% and at 18 months it was 46%. Similarly, the reduction in severe malaria was 47% at one year and 36% at 18 months. In the six to ten weeks group, the reduction in clinical malaria was 31% at one year and 27% at 18 months. The reduction in severe malaria was 36% at one year and 17% at 18 months.

Get The News You Want
Read market moving news with a personalized feed of stocks you care about.
Get The App

RTS, S continued to display an acceptable safety and tolerability profile during the 18 month follow-up. No new safety signals were observed during this longer follow-up period. The incidence of severe adverse events overall was similar in participants in each group.

Data Yet To Be Reported
There will be another follow-up on data at 30 months which will include the effects of a booster shot given at 18 months. This data should be available by the end of 2014. Glaxo’s CEO, Andrew Witty, told BBC that “Over the next couple of years, we will get a very clear view of what is really happening with protection. Is it waning or is it just that people are acquiring natural immunity? Do we need a booster dose or not? All of that will become clear in the next two years or so.”

How Good Were These Results?
These results were quite modest when viewed against the 90% or greater reduction in disease that is generally achieved with childhood vaccines. Also, the waning of effectiveness with time is a concern. On the other hand, malaria has been intransigent to vaccines and this is the first vaccine ever to show meaningful efficacy against this disease. Looked at in this way, the results are more impressive.

Glaxo says it will move ahead to develop the vaccine commercially so this signals that they think the results are clinically meaningful. Based on these data, GSK now intends to submit in 2014 a regulatory application to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) under a process aimed at facilitating new drugs for poorer countries. If the EMA licenses the vaccine, the next step would be a recommendation that RTS,S be incorporated in childhood vaccination programs and this could be as early as 2015. Bear in mind that Glaxo has committed to sell RTS,S at cost plus 5% and that this markup over cost will be directed at tropical disease research. Glaxo will receive no profits from commercialization of this vaccine.

GSK is developing RTS,S in partnership with the non-profit PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative (MVI), which receives grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. David Kaslow, vice president of product development at PATH, believes that RTS,S would serve as a useful additional tool alongside other malaria control measures such as mosquito nets, insecticides and anti-malaria drugs. He said that “Given the huge disease burden of malaria among African children, we cannot ignore what these latest results tell us about the potential for RTS,S to have a measurable and significant impact on the health of millions of young children in Africa.” He went on to say that “This trial continues to show that a malaria vaccine could potentially bring an important additional benefit beyond that provided by the tools already in use.”

Bill Gates has given billions for vaccine development in the developing world. In regard to RTS,S and these trial results, he said. “It is very promising, the very fact that this vaccine works. It gives data about how to build better vaccines. It gives us a tool to combine with the bed nets, the mosquito spraying, the mosquito killing and all of these interventions that will help us bring the number of deaths down quite a bit.”

Will RTS,S Be Commercialized?
I think that there are several strong arguments to suggest that RTS,S will be introduced into the vaccination programs of African countries. GSK obviously feels that it warrants approval as is shown by its announcement that it will file for approval. Even though the protection rate is not as high as is normally seen with childhood vaccines, the data suggests that there will be millions of children who will benefit and that hospitalizations for malaria and deaths will be significantly decreased. Although it has not been confirmed, I think that the Gates Foundation along with other charitable organizations may pick up a good part of the costs of vaccination, which at steady state could be on the order of $400 million per year according to my estimates.

Building a Sales Model for RTS,S
The malaria vaccine, if approved by EMA and recommended for inclusion by WHO, will be incorporated into childhood vaccination programs. I am assuming that the vaccine will be applied in the six to ten week age group at steady state. However, in the first two years, there would be a catch-up for those who had not been vaccinated. I have not included any estimates for booster shots although I suspect that they will be used. The primary issue with uptake will be the availability of heath care infrastructure that can administer the vaccine. I have limited confidence in my projections, but one has to start somewhere. I expect to refine and improve these projections in the future.

Here are my assumptions:

  1. The vaccine is introduced in early 2016.
  2. There are 180 million births per year in sub-Saharan Africa, but I am estimating that the health care infrastructure as it now stands can vaccinate about 48 million children in the richer and more developed countries.
  3. There will also be a catch up for children in the five month to 17 months cohort in the first and second year of about the same number, but sales in this cohort disappear by the third year of marketing.
  4. The price per dose is $2.50 per vaccination and I assume that this does not increase over time. This is representative of the prices paid for other vaccines.
  5. There are four doses per child.
  6. Based on experience seen with other childhood vaccines, nearly 75% of children could be vaccinated by the third year and this rate would then hold steady.
  7. My model may be conservative as the number of babies that can be vaccinated could expand beyond 48 million. It is also conservative in not estimating any booster doses.

The results of all of these assumptions are shown in the following table.