Amgen To Acquire Onyx, Maker Of Kyprolis; What Does It Mean For The Myeloma Community?
Onyx Pharmaceuticals, the South San Francisco, California-based company that developed and now markets Kyprolis (carfilzomib), announced yesterday evening that it is being acquired by Amgen.
Amgen (NASDAQ:AMGN), which is based outside of Los Angeles, is the world’s largest biotech company.
Within the multiple myeloma community, Amgen is known most for its anemia medications – Aranesp (darbepoetin alfa) and Epogen (epoetin alfa, also marketed as Procrit and Eprex) – as well as its drugs that increase the body’s production of white blood cells – Neupogen (filgrastim) and Neulasta (pegfilgrastim).
In addition, Amgen markets Xgeva (denosumab), a bone-strengthening agent currently approved for use in cancer patients whose disease has spread into the bone marrow. Xgeva has been tested as a potential alternative to bisphosphonates, such as Aredia (pamidronate) and Zometa (zoledronic acid), as a treatment for bones weakened by multiple myeloma. However, Xgeva is not yet approved for use in myeloma patients.
MORE INFORMATION: News articles about: Forum discussions about: - Kyprolis |
Yesterday’s announcement of the Onyx acquisition concludes a process that began two months ago, when Amgen made an unsolicited offer for Onyx (NASDAQ:ONXX). After it received Amgen’s offer, Onyx effectively put itself up for sale, soliciting competing bids from a number of other companies.
Ultimately, Amgen prevailed in the bidding war for Onyx, with a winning offer of $125 per share -- just slightly more than the original, unsolicited $120-per-share offer it made for Onyx in June.
Amgen’s acquisition of Onyx is expected to be finalized, subject to regulatory approval, by the beginning of the fourth quarter this year.
What Does The acquisition Mean For The Myeloma Community?
The Onyx acquisition is unlikely to have any significant near-term impact relevant to the myeloma community
Kyprolis, the myeloma treatment Onyx developed and now sells in the United States, will continue to be available, both before and after Amgen wraps up its acquisition of Onyx.
Plans for the launch of Kyprolis outside of the United States also should be unaffected by the acquisition. Currently, analysts expect Kyprolis to launch in Europe no earlier than the second half of 2015.
The intermediate-term impact of the acquisition may be positive – particularly for myeloma patients overseas.
Prior to the acquisition, Onyx had planned to launch Kyprolis on its own in most overseas markets. This plan would have required Onyx to put in place, and then build up, a substantial amount of administrative and sales infrastructure in other countries, potentially slowing the launch of Kyprolis after its approval in Europe and elsewhere.
If, however, the Amgen acquisition of Onyx proceeds as planned, Kyprolis will launch overseas under the care of Amgen, which already has extensive operations across the globe. Those resources will be available to prepare for, and then support, the launch of Kyprolis in markets outside the U.S. once regulatory approvals are secured.
This potential impact of the Onyx acquisition was highlight by Dr. Robert Orlowski, a myeloma specialist at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. He told The Beacon, “This acquisition could be a very positive step because Amgen's global experience can help expand access to [Kyprolis], both in the United States and especially in other countries.”
The primary uncertainty surrounding the Onyx acquisition’s impact on the myeloma community lies in its longer-term impact.
Until yesterday’s announcement, Onyx had in place rather aggressive plans to further develop Kyprolis and also to develop a potential new myeloma treatment, oprozomib, which is similar to Kyprolis, but can be taken orally rather than having to be injected or infused, as is the case with Kyprolis.
Once the Onyx acquisition is completed, an open question will be whether Amgen will be as focused as Onyx has been in pursing the further development of Kyprolis and opozomib.
As Dr. Robert Orlowski noted, the acquisition could “strongly benefit the further development of [Kyprolis], and especially of oprozomib, given the experience of Amgen in the oncology field, and their ability to facilitate more studies than could be supported by Onyx. However, for these benefits to be realized, Amgen will need to make a commitment to maintain the current aggressive development plan that was put in place by Onyx.”
The question of commitment and focus is prompted, in part, by another pharmaceutical company acquisition that took place a bit more than five years ago – the acquisition of Millennium Pharmaceuticals, the company that developed Velcade (bortezomib), by Takeda Pharmaceutical in May 2008.
As is expected to be the case with the Onyx acquisition, Takeda’s acquisition of Millennium had little immediate impact on Velcade’s availability or sales.
However, some might argue that Millennium has not been as aggressive as it might have been as an independent company in developing or acquiring the rights to potential new myeloma treatments.
Development of the company’s successor to Velcade, ixazomib (MLN9708), was slow for many years, and the launch of the drug is still not expected until 2015. In addition, Millennium has not been as aggressive as, for example, Celgene, in making deals to give it access to potential new myeloma treatments initially developed by other companies.
Celgene, which is independent, currently markets thalidomide, Revlimid (lenalidomide), and Pomalyst (pomalidomide) as treatments for myeloma. It has struck a number of deals in recent years to acquire marketing rights to potential new treatments for myeloma, including a recent licensing agreement for MOR202 (see related Celgene press release).
Thus, although the near- and intermediate-term impact of the Amgen acquisition of Onyx on the myeloma community is likely to be neutral to positive (particularly overseas), the longer-term impact is less certain. It will depend on the extent to which Amgen, once it takes over responsibility for Onyx’s product portfolio, is able to remain focused on developing Onyx’s existing portfolio while also developing potential new treatments for myeloma.
For additional information about the Onyx acquisition, see the related press release from Onyx.
Related Articles:
- Once-Weekly High-Dose Kyprolis Yields Deeper Responses And Longer Remissions Than Twice-Weekly Kyprolis (ASCO & EHA 2018)
- Common Measures Of Heart And Blood Vessel Health May Predict Risk Of Heart-Related Side Effects During Treatment With Kyprolis
- FDA Approves Once-Weekly Dosing And Revised Safety Information For Kyprolis
- Eyelid-Related Complications Of Velcade Therapy: New Insights And Recommendations
- ASCO 2018 Update – Expert Perspectives On The Key Multiple Myeloma-Related Oral Presentations
Thanks for the informative article about the purchase of Onyx co. by Amgen. It looks like Amgen would be in a better position to eventually get dstribution of Kyprolis set up outside the US, since they already have corproate branches in many countries.
I found it interesting to know that Amgen also has a bone building drug which is not a bisphosphonate...dinosumab (Xgeva). Is it currently being tested in clinical trials for myeloma patients? There is often an upper time limit as to how long a patient will be given a bisphosphonate treatment, due to the risk of ONJ (osteonecrosis of the jaw).
Nancy, several studies indicate that Xgeva is at least as effective as Zometa. One of these studies included myeloma patients; however, this study also showed that myeloma patients receiving Xgeva were twice as likely to die as those receiving Zometa (see related Beacon news). Since this previous study only included 10 percent myeloma patients, there's another ongoing Phase 3 study comparing Xgeva and Zometa specifically in myeloma patients.
Hi Beacon Staff, I see from the link to the Nov. 2010 article that not only was there a higher mortality in myeloma patients taking Xgeva, there was also a higher rate of ONJ (1.8% COMPARED TO 1.3%). so I can see why it was not approved for myeloma. I suppose that future studies might focus on what dosages were better? Another possible side effect that I have only read about with bisphosphonates is that sometimes the new bone is crystalline in structure and can sheer off in breaks. This has apparently happened in women who were being treated for osteoporoses, not necessarily bone marrow cancer though. Bone health is quite a problem for older women sometimes!