Independent education resourceInformation here does not replace care from a qualified health professional.
Peptide Therapy GuideClear peptide education

Educational guide

Synageva, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Add Second Rare Disease Program to Alliance

Synageva will receive $9 million up front under expanded deal. Synageva BioPharma and Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma (MTPC) are expanding their rare disease agreement to develop a second protein therapeutic for an undisclosed orphan disease. Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma

Written by Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team
For education only

This guide cannot diagnose a condition or recommend a personal treatment plan. Discuss medical questions with a qualified professional.

Synageva will receive $9 million up front under expanded deal.

Synageva BioPharma and Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma (MTPC) are expanding their rare disease agreement to develop a second protein therapeutic for an undisclosed orphan disease. Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma will make an up-front payment of $9 million. Synageva will receive reimbursement for development costs, potential future development and commercial milestone payments, as well as royalties from product revenue.

The firms’ arrangement, as is the case under the original agreement, uses the Synageva Expression Platform, which is an integrated technology for protein production, processing, and purification. The companies first decided to work together in September 2011. That deal came with a $3 million up-front fee to Synageva and was framed on the development of a therapeutic for an undisclosed orphan disease.

Synageva is a clinical-stage company focused on protein therapeutics for rare diseases. Its lead program, SBC-102, is being developed as an enzyme-replacement therapy for lysosomal acid lipase (LAL) deficiency, a lysosomal storage disorder, and is a recombinant form of the human LAL enzyme. SBC-102 is currently being evaluated in global clinical trials and has been granted orphan designations by the FDA and EMA. Additionally, SBC-102 received fast track designation by the FDA.

“The synergy of Synageva’s innovative technologies and MTPC’s expertise in R&D of biologics will seek to create protein therapeutics that contribute to healthy life around the world,” comments Masayuki Mitsuka, board director, executive officer, global product strategy of MTPC.

Connected reading

Helpful context for this guide

Source-derived material selected through this article’s indexed topics.

Related questions

01Undruggable or unscreenable?

Another obstacle to discovering new PPI inhibitors is the lack of libraries designed to hunt for them, points out Philippe Roche, PhD, senior scientist at the Integrative Structural and Chemical Biology team at the Cancer Research Center of Marseilles, France. “If you screen PPIs using libraries that were designed for kinases or GPCRs, that’s why you don’t get a lot of good results,” he says. To that end, his group began assembling a library focused on orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs. The result was 2P2Idb, a hand-curated, structural database cataloguing orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs for which the interface had been 3D characterized. From analyzing these known PPI inhibitors, and what structures they had in common, Roche and his colleagues developed a model to predict whether compounds would likely inhibit PPIs. Using this method, 2P2Idb creates an enriched screening library that dramatically increases the hit rate compared to standard libraries. Having proven their success with a small library of 1600 compounds, they are in the process of expanding the library to 10,000 compounds. Once that’s published, “the idea is to make this library available to labs around the world,” Roche says. “We will provide the library free of charge for people to be able to screen PPI targets.”

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
02How stable is the antibody?

A crucial question often addressed during preclinical development focuses on the in vivo stability of therapeutic antibodies. Increasing the half-life of a therapeutic antibody has several benefits ranging from higher treatment efficacy to increased advantages for the patients who will have a fewer number of therapy sessions and a reduced cost. Given these compelling benefits, following the identification of therapeutic antibodies with the desired specificity, developers usually subject them to a refinement step to increase their stability. This process is often hindered by the lack of reliable experimental tools to predict the half-life of antibodies in patients. The major hurdle of using mouse models to predict antibody stability in the serum lies in the way immunoglobulin proteins are processed by the organism. In mammals, most proteins circulating in the serum undergo constant uptake by endothelial cells and are routed through the endosomes to the lysosomal compartment for degradation. In the endosomes, immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins are recognized and bound by a transmembrane protein, called the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which mediates their recycling to the plasma membrane and subsequent release back into the serum. As a result, the half-life of IgGs are significantly extended by this mechanism. Since most therapeutic antibodies belong to the IgG class, this recycling system is very relevant for their relative stability in the body. Remarkably, the relative affinity between IgGs and FcRn is extremely disparate between different species, with the mouse receptor showing a much higher affinity than its human counterpart.

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
P

About the author

Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team

Editorial team for Peptide Therapy Guide.

View all articles →