Blog Archives

Celgene is a company built on a foundation of bold innovation to address areas of significant need for patients with cancer and other debilitating diseases. This unyielding drive has led the company to developments that have transformed the care of diseases like multiple myeloma and pancreatic cancer and has provided important new options for patients with psoriatic diseases.

As the company has grown, so has its commitment to innovation. In fact, the company has increased its investment in research and development by more than 36 percent per year on average since 2006, when its lead therapy for multiple hematologic diseases was approved. During this time, the company also built what would be a defining part of its research efforts, the distributed research model.

By coupling Celgene’s internal research and traditional business development efforts with a program focused on identifying and nurturing disruptive science outside the company, Celgene was able to option promising candidates for rare and debilitating diseases. The program currently features more than 50 collaborations with 21 unique compounds in clinical development.

Robert Hershberg

ROBERT HERSHBERG, M.D., PH.D., CELGENE’S EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND HEAD OF BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AND GLOBAL ALLIANCES.

“We are focused on great science, first and foremost,” said Robert Hershberg, M.D., Ph.D., Celgene’s Executive Vice President and Head of Business Development and Global Alliances. “We seek in our partners what we seek in our own scientific and development teams. Notably, we seek passion, a commitment to excellence, and a strong desire to bring novel treatments to improve patients’ lives.”

“The distributed research model—in place at Celgene for almost a decade—recognizes and embraces the fact that contributions to progress in human health can be readily seen in academic institutions, private foundations, small and large biotechnology companies, and in the pharmaceutical sector,” he continued. “Importantly, no single institution, company or entity can do this alone and there is an increasing interdependence on a range of efforts to bring this promise to patients. We seek partners in our core areas of scientific interest (Protein Homeostasis, Immuno-Oncology, Epigenetics, Immunology/Inflammation, and Neuroscience) and clinical interest (Hematology, Oncology, Inflammatory diseases) and hope to identify programs in adjacent, novel areas as well.”

One of the keys to the growth of the programs was to identify and incentivize this innovation early on.

“As products increase in both their complexity and their precision, intense support early in the development process is critical. The establishment of relevant pre-clinical models and deep interrogation of novel pathways provide the appropriate roadmap for moving early science forward towards the clinic,” continued Hershberg. “In early studies of these novel therapies in patients, an intense focus on ‘translational’ medicine—developing tools to gather as much data as possible in early clinical trials. These early efforts both improve the likelihood of clinical success and can dramatically reduce the timelines required to bring novel therapies to patients that desperately need them.”

Along with groundbreaking research, these partnerships also provide the opportunity to learn critical lessons in discovery research through new platforms for Celgene, and a chance to advance programs alongside an industry veteran for the partner companies.

An important example of this was the partnership with Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The long-term research partnership provided the opportunity to evaluate multiple programs, to adjust the terms to fit each company, and most importantly, to deliver the first FDA-approved product to come out of Celgene’s distributed research model.

“Close collaboration from the very start has been key to the success of our relationship with Celgene” said David Schenkein, M.D., Chief Executive Officer of Agios. “By focusing on each other’s strengths, we were able to pursue the science and develop a new medicine, less than four years from the first in human study to approval in a blood cancer that had not seen a new medicine in nearly 40 years.”

Hershberg has a unique perspective on partnering with Celgene as he has now served on both sides of the model, in his current role as head of the company’s business development efforts, and as a partner during his time as CEO of VentiRx.

“Celgene has been on the leading edge of business development to engage external partners to extend our Research and Development footprint. Importantly, many of these partnerships allow and facilitate a partner’s ability to do what they do best—and to advance programs into early and mid-stage clinical development. The business structures are flexible and ideally designed to meet both Celgene’s and the partner’s unique needs,” said Hershberg.

Another long-term partner was recently in the news as well. Acceleron Pharma, alongside Celgene, announced top-line results from multiple pivotal studies of a collaboration that had been ongoing for more than ten years.

“Our collaboration is focused on developing and delivering transformational therapies to patients in areas of disease with few options,” said Habib Dable, President and Chief Executive Officer of Acceleron. “Because of our mutual commitment to this focus, we have advanced to the point where we are preparing for potential approval. Our shared experience has kept the combined team energized and on mission throughout.”

The close collaborations that make up Celgene’s distributed research model have bolstered a leading biopharmaceutical pipeline for Celgene, provided vital, early support for its partners’ promising programs and even delivered a new therapy to patients in need.

“The opportunity to partner early and leverage our research platform to identify potentially disruptive therapies has led to the opportunity to expand our collaboration twice already to encompass new targets and new areas of disease,” said Werner Lanthaler, Chief Executive Officer of Evotec AG. “We believe our work together across these multiple platforms have the potential to make meaningful impacts on patients’ lives and we continue to partner closely to make this happen.”

Celgene will continue to look for transformational science both within and outside of its walls as it seeks to deliver on its mission to improve the lives of patients worldwide. Successful partnerships, like those it has fostered already, will be essential in that effort.

In August 2005, Amelia List celebrated her first birthday, and her mother Julie breathed a sigh of relief. She had feared Amelia would develop severe food allergies, as her five-year-old sister Autumn had, by the time she turned one. But it was so far, so good.

Unfortunately, everything went downhill from there, Julie recalls. A month later, the entire family got the stomach flu. Everyone recovered well except for Amelia, whose vomiting and diarrhea continued. Six weeks later, she had lost 20 percent of her body weight. Julie and her husband took their daughter to a gastroenterologist, who diagnosed Amelia with eosinophilic esophagitis.

Having already joined several food allergy forums online, Julie knew what that meant. Eosinophilic esophagitis was not your typical allergic reaction to food. She turned to her husband. “We’re going to be one of those people whose kid can only eat one or two foods,” she told him.

More than 150,000 children and adults in the United States live with eosinophilic esophagitis, a relatively new disease that was only first recognized in the 1990s. There are currently no FDA-approved pharmaceuticals to treat EoE. Symptoms may be managed with elimination diets and other methods. Julie is sharing their story to raise awareness of the disease, with the hope that more can be done to improve their daily struggle.

Identifying Triggers

Julie knew eosinophilic esophagitis was not a typical food allergy, but she was stunned when their local gastroenterologist told them that he could only diagnose but not treat the condition. In fact, at that time, there was no doctor near their home in South Carolina who treated this rare disease. For the next four years, the family traveled eight hours to Cincinnati to see a specialist whenever necessary.

The doctor explained that proteins in the foods Amelia was eating were triggering a type of white blood cell called eosinophils to inflame her esophagus. This inflammation led to her vomiting, difficulty swallowing and recurring stomach pain.

Amelia underwent food trials to identify her food triggers, eating one or more foods at a time for two months to see whether they made her sick. If they didn’t, she’d get an endoscopy to check her upper digestive tract for inflammation. Her doctor would put her under anesthesia and insert a flexible tube with a camera into Amelia’s upper digestive tract.

Her doctor also took six to ten biopsies throughout the esophagus to determine if eosinophils were present. “The biopsies can reveal if eosinophils are present and causing damage that is not visible to the eye,” Julie said. “We never knew if food was safe until the biopsy results were returned.”

She went through this process with a dozen foods. To get her required nutrition, Amelia was given an amino-acid based formula through a gastric feeding tube. “The formula had no proteins that would trigger allergies, but it tasted terrible,” Julie said.

We never tell them they can’t do anything.
We’ve tube-fed Amelia while hiking.

Overcoming Setbacks

In 2007, the List family received more devastating news when their middle child, Abby, was diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis at the age of six. Studies have shown that siblings of someone with eosinophilic esophagitis are at increased risk for the disease, suggesting a role for genetic factors. Environmental factors are also thought to have a role.

Then in 2016, Amelia had a severe, life-threatening allergic reaction to white rice, her first allergic reaction unrelated to her eosinophilic esophagitis. Her immune system reacted, and Amelia soon found she could no longer eat any of the foods she previously tolerated.

Amelia resumed consuming formula through the gastric tube but then started reacting to that, too. To help tolerate the formula, she takes medication twice a day. She once again began food-testing with endoscopies to validate new safe foods. Since her initial diagnosis, Amelia has had 32 endoscopies and counting.

Today, she continues to consume formula, but it is not her sole source of nutrition. She can eat seven foods: apples, sweet potatoes, kidney beans, soy, millet flour, turkey and black olives. “For sure, you get sick of them, but I just have to keep eating them,” Amelia said. “I really don’t have any other choice.”

Growing Up Quickly

Amelia has been administering her own tube-feedings since she was a kid. Now 14, she has it down to a science. She eats this way three times a day, and she takes her equipment with her everywhere, plus the formula and water to mix.

Amelia reminds herself not to let eosinophilic esophagitis hold her back from living the life she’s dreamed of living. “It’s part of you, but it doesn’t control you. It’s not who you are,” Amelia said.

Going out—whether to school, on a field trip, to a friend’s house or on vacation—requires planning. If she goes to a party or sleepover, she brings a can of olives or a sweet potato in case she gets hungry. Sometimes, of course, she chooses to forgo events if she decides that they’re not worth the effort.

“We never tell them they can’t do anything,” Julie said. “We’ve tube-fed Amelia while hiking. But they definitely analyze situations ahead of time, which most kids don’t have to think about. These kids are very responsible and have to grow up quickly.”

To learn more about how Celgene is committed to supporting research for rare diseases, read Supporting Research to Find Cures for Rare Diseases.

While understanding the impact of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) on the lives of people diagnosed with these blood cancers can help inform their care, assessments of quality of life in MDS have been, for the most part, lacking.

But a recent survey commissioned by the MDS Foundation, Inc. is helping to fill that gap, to shed some much-needed light on the experience of patients and their caregivers. According to the results, many people with MDS surveyed said that fatigue had a significant impact on their daily lives.

“The number one complaint that we hear, by far, from patients with MDS is that they don’t have the energy to do the things that make them feel like they’re living,” said Tracey Iraca, executive director of the MDS Foundation, which is raising awareness of quality-of-life issues during this year’s MDS World Awareness Day. “There are so many little things we take for granted that these people struggle with.”

A Closer Look at the MDS Symptom of Fatigue

Tracey Iraca

TRACEY IRACA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE MDS FOUNDATION, INC., BELIEVES A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROMES AFFECT PATIENT LIVES IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS IMPROVING THE MANAGEMENT OF THE DISEASE.

The fatigue and tiredness that people with MDS experience interferes with their daily activities, according to the survey. Patients surveyed reported that they often struggled with tasks such as cooking, cleaning, shopping, climbing stairs and taking care of their pets. Several respondents said that they relied on other people to complete many of those chores.

“My house is not nearly as clean since [I was diagnosed with] MDS,” one person responded. “I am exhausted a lot of the time. I can only work short times, and I have to sit down—then I usually fall asleep.”

Some people reported feeling tired all day, every day, while others only experienced exhaustion in the afternoon. Some also said that naps in the afternoon had become a necessity in their everyday life.

Fatigue drains people with MDS not only physically but emotionally, according to the survey. People with MDS reported losing patience with themselves and worrying about their loss of independence. Several also said they experienced feelings of isolation and loneliness from not being able to visit their family and friends.

Why Fatigue Is a Symptom of Myelodysplastic Syndrome

It didn’t surprise Iraca that fatigue was of significant concern for people with MDS. She has heard it dozens of times over the past decade at the Foundation. And she understands why.

In MDS, the bone marrow doesn’t produce enough healthy red blood cells, which transport oxygen to different cells and tissues. Young red blood cells are then inhibited from properly maturing, caused by what is known as erythroid maturation defects.

“The normal development of all blood cells is a complex process that relies on both stem cells and the environment within the bone marrow,” explained Sandra Kurtin, board member of the MDS Foundation, assistant professor of clinical medicine and assistant professor of nursing, The University of Arizona Cancer Center. “This process goes awry in MDS due to a variety of issues.”

As a result of this ineffective development of red blood cells, up to 90 percent of people with MDS have low red blood cell counts, a condition known as anemia. Without enough healthy red blood cells to transport oxygen, it leaves people feeling continuously tired and weak throughout the day.

“Patients are becoming much more aware of what’s happening—they are learning to talk with their doctor about their fatigue and other symptoms of anemia.”

Managing MDS Linked Anemia

Understanding how MDS affects the daily lives of people is the first step toward improving care for the thousands living with this disease. When people with MDS, doctors and caregivers discuss the complete patient experience, they can address what matters most.

“Patients are becoming much more aware of what’s happening—they are learning to talk with their doctor about their fatigue and other symptoms of anemia,” Iraca noted. “We want to educate people to identify these symptoms earlier on so that they can get treatment sooner for anemia.”

People with MDS may receive red transfusions to raise their low blood counts and antibiotics to prevent or fight infections. Some people may also receive a bone marrow transplant, chemotherapy, or other treatment options. Iraca is hopeful that research will help us learn more about the disease and how to treat it.

“Researchers are working to identify genetic defects in MDS so that they can develop therapies to target them,” Iraca said. “The research that’s happening now makes us hopeful.”

To learn about the high unmet need for people with MDS, read “Why I Advocate for People with Myelodysplastic Syndromes.”

One of Celgene’s defining characteristics has been a unique distributed research model, supporting promising programs from cutting-edge partners to advance new medicines for patients. In this model, Celgene and its partners mutually benefit from the resources, expertise and innovation from each entity.

One of the longest-standing examples of this collaborative strategy at work is the partnership between Celgene and Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which began in 2010. The Celgene and Agios collaboration has encompassed research and development across a range of candidates in metabolic immuno-oncology and, importantly, led to the 2017 U.S. FDA approval of IDHIFA® (enasidenib) –the first approved medicine from the Celgene distributed research model.

Now, IDHIFA has earned another distinction – Prix Galien winner. IDHIFA was named the 2018 Best Pharmaceutical Product at the 12th annual Prix Galien Awards Gala on October 25 in New York City.

Presented by the Galien Foundation, the Prix Galien is an international award that recognizes outstanding achievements in improving the human condition through the development of innovative therapies and is regarded as the equivalent of the Nobel Prize in biopharmaceutical and medical technology research.

“All winners have made crucial contributions to the advancement of scientific understanding and improved outcomes for humankind,” said Bruno Cohen, Chairman of the Galien Foundation in a statement. “We are proud to honor their tireless work and unrelenting spirit.”

The road to this signature award reflects the shared commitment to patients at both Celgene and Agios. Working closely from the discovery stage, the companies evaluated potential candidates, conducted pre-clinical and clinical research, and ultimately achieved a U.S. approval and launch – less than four years from the first patient ever being dosed with IDHIFA. The companies share commercialization of IDHIFA.

“For all of us at Agios, it is truly an incredible honor to receive the 2018 Prix Galien Award with Celgene for IDHIFA for Best Pharmaceutical Product. As one of the highest accolades for pharmaceutical research and development, this award recognizes the extraordinary, collaborative effort that led to the creation of this important medicine,” said David Schenkein, M.D., Chief Executive Officer of Agios. “This feat would not be possible without the support of our partner Celgene, the patients who participated in our clinical trial, and the Agios scientists who made the IDH discovery and created the IDHIFA molecule.”

“The Celgene and Agios teams have spent years working together toward a common goal,” said Nadim Ahmed, President of Hematology/Oncology for Celgene. “The Prix Galien award is a recognition that our shared commitment has a meaningful impact on the lives of patients.”

“The Celgene and Agios team represent the very best attributes of collaboration,” said Krishnan Viswanadhan, Vice President of Global Alliances for Celgene, who accepted the Prix Galien on behalf of the team alongside Dr. Schenkein. “The combination of Agios’ pioneering science and Celgene’s deep experience in blood cancer research created tremendous potential for innovation, and the drive to help patients constantly pushed us to deliver.”

The Prix Galien award for IDHIFA recognizes, first and foremost, the significant potential to help change outcomes for patients, but also the value and importance of great partnerships.

Please see full Prescribing Information, including Boxed WARNING, for IDHIFA®

The current benchmark for efficacy in clinical trials of new plaque psoriasis treatments is a 75 percent reduction in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), which is a measure of the area of skin affected along with the skin’s appearance. But the most bothersome symptom, according to a survey of patients with plaque psoriasis, was not skin appearance, but itching.

As thousands of dermatologists gather at the 27th European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Congress in Paris to discuss the latest data from ongoing clinical trials in psoriasis, Dr. Colby Evans, M.D., a dermatologist in Austin, TX, and also the immediate past chair of the Board of Directors of the National Psoriasis Foundation, discusses how researchers measure the effectiveness of treatments in clinical trials and how those measurements could be more comprehensive.

How do researchers measure the effectiveness of new plaque psoriasis treatments in clinical trials?

“Efficacy of plaque psoriasis treatments has immensely improved over the last 20 years, making more ambitious endpoints realistic. While a 75 percent reduction in PASI score has been the Food and Drug Administration’s benchmark, we see a growing interest in PASI 90 or 100 in more current trials. We want to get patients as close as we can to PASI 100. That being said, achieving a PASI 50 along with an improvement to quality of life is still clinically beneficial.”

DR. COLBY EVANS, M.D.

DR. COLBY EVANS, M.D., FROM THE NATIONAL PSORIASIS FOUNDATION BELIEVES THAT THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THE MEASUREMENT AND GOALS OF EFFICACY IN PSORIASIS CLINICAL TRIALS.

Does PASI comprehensively capture all the clinical benefits of psoriasis treatments?

“PASI measures the size, as well as the level of scale, redness and thickness of psoriasis plaques. It does not capture other debilitating symptoms associated with psoriasis, such as psoriatic arthritis, itching or social stigma.”

How impactful are those symptoms on the lives of patients with plaque psoriasis?

“Itching can be debilitating and miserable, and can interfere with daily functioning. Survey data showed that people with psoriasis reported having a higher level of sleep-related problems compared to the general population.

Psoriatic arthritis is also of high concern among patients with psoriasis. Approximately 30 percent of plaque psoriasis patients develop psoriatic arthritis. It’s painful, can distort the joints and can be permanently disabling if untreated.”

What are the potential consequences of not capturing improvements in these symptoms?

“It’s important to take full measure of the patient and their life before you decide on treatment. PASI is a reasonable place to start, but it is more complicated than just the extent and thickness of their plaques. If you’re ignoring specific symptoms, patients can get left behind, and treatment decisions may be made without factoring in critical information.”

The more safe and effective treatment options we have, the better for patients with plaque psoriasis.

Do you measure PASI to make treatment decisions for patients who are not in clinical trials?

“In the real world, outside of trials, we don’t use a strict algorithmic treatment of psoriasis. In the regular clinical setting, I am more interested in knowing if the patient can live their life socially, occupationally and recreationally, and without feeling limited by their psoriasis. If they are, I know we’re on the path to success.”

How can clinical trials evolve to more comprehensively measure meaningful improvements for patients with plaque psoriasis?

“It’s becoming fairly common to have secondary endpoints that include itching and quality of life, which is progress. We’re seeing better management of psoriasis sub-types, such as patients with severe hand and foot psoriasis or patients who have severe arthritis without a lot of skin disease. Since the condition is quite diverse, there’s no one treatment for every patient. So the more safe and effective treatment options we have, the better for patients with plaque psoriasis.

With that in mind, many people who have had plaque psoriasis for decades aren’t aware of some of the new treatments. So a tremendous amount of patient education needs to be done.”

To learn more about treatment challenges that patients with psoriasis continue to face, read “Moderate Psoriasis Patient Needs Should Not Be Overlooked.”

Posted on by

While innovative therapies have helped improve the relative survival rate for patients with multiple myeloma, the disease remains incurable with most patients experiencing repeated relapse and ultimately becoming refractory to treatments. Today, research continues to delve into whether treating relapsed multiple myeloma with combination therapies may be an appropriate option for certain patients. More agents could also result in increased toxicities and patients must be monitored closely.

­At the 54th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), new data regarding the use of triplet therapy for relapsed multiple myeloma were presented. Now four or more drug combinations are being examined as well. In this interview, Dr. Paul Richardson, the RJ Corman Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and clinical program leader and director of clinical research at the Jerome Lipper Multiple Myeloma Center at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses the new data presented at this year’s ASCO meeting and how the future of relapsed multiple myeloma treatment could look.

DR. PAUL RICHARDSON

DR. PAUL RICHARDSON FROM DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE BELIEVES THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO SEE PROMISING RESULTS FROM COMBINATION THERAPIES FOR RELAPSED/REFRACTORY MULTIPLE MYELOMA.

Why have triplet and quadruplet regimens become more frequently used to treat relapsed multiple myeloma?

“Multiple myeloma is a heterogeneous disease, which means that patients typically have multiple subpopulations of malignant plasma cells with different molecular profiles and characteristics. When patients with multiple myeloma are given a single therapy, some of these subpopulations recede while others may grow. This phenomenon is believed to contribute to treatment resistance and eventual relapse.”

“So the theory that combination therapies provide a multi-pronged attack to target multiple myeloma subpopulations may be a reason why we are seeing more relapsed multiple myeloma patients being treated with combination therapies. Quadruplet regimens are also being investigated for high-risk patients with particularly resistant multiple myeloma.”

How have data presented at this year’s ASCO meeting moved the field forward?

“At ASCO, we saw new data from clinical trials comparing triplet with doublet regimens for relapsed multiple myeloma. Those findings support the idea that if you throw a wider net around the illness early with a triplet, you may achieve greater clinical benefit. At the same time, as we continue to explore new combinations, we are finding more regimens that may be better tolerated by patients.”

Why do many of these combinations include immunomodulators?

“Immunomodulators are an integral part of multiple myeloma treatment in both the newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory setting. These therapies have numerous effects on tumor cells, the immune system, and the tumor microenvironment which we believe leads to their anti-multiple myeloma activity. In fact, they constitute a foundation for therapy regimens in multiple myeloma.”

“At this year’s ASCO, we saw important new data from trials exploring the interactions between these therapeutic classes in the relapsed setting.”

Although the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma remains an unmet medical need, we’re making progress. The data presented at ASCO on combination therapies and potential breakthrough approaches like CAR T cell therapy are particularly exciting.

How are researchers taking a more precision-focused approach to treating relapsed multiple myeloma?

“Choosing the most appropriate therapy based on the genetic causes of a disease makes sense but is challenging in multiple myeloma, because the cancer is so genetically unstable. For example, we sequenced the genome of one patient at diagnosis and identified over 5,000 disease-associated mutations. By the time he relapsed, we had found more than 12,000. When you have that number of genetic changes, targeting a single mutation will be unlikely to make much of a difference on its own.”

“To help address this problem, we have to take a modified precision medicine approach. Researchers are studying whether combining backbone agents such as immunomodulators and proteasome inhibitors that have broad success in the disease with more targeted agents and evaluating these combination regimens, and in particular with monoclonal antibodies.”

What are your thoughts on the future of relapsed multiple myeloma treatment following this year’s ASCO meeting?

“Although the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma remains an unmet medical need, we’re making substantial progress. The data presented at ASCO on combination therapies and potential breakthrough approaches like CAR T cell therapy are particularly exciting. While the FDA approved CAR T cell therapies have already shown promise in other cancers, multiple myeloma is a much tougher nut to crack. So we’ll have to wait and see what happens with these trials in the longer term, but early data are encouraging.”

To learn more about the advances discussed at ASCO 2018, read “ASCO 2018 Preview: Precision Medicine, CAR T Cells and Immunomodulators.”

Dr. Richardson regularly provides input as a paid consultant for Celgene.

By Mark J. Alles, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Celgene Corporation

Americans want and deserve better health care.1  Yet many patients are also concerned about the affordability of health care, including out-of-pocket costs which are rising faster than health care spending.2  When it comes to health care, we should not have to choose between access, quality and affordability. This is especially important for those patients suffering with life-threatening diseases who may only be able to be effectively treated with the newest, most innovative medicines. For the benefit of all patients, we must find ways to ensure that American health care improves access and quality, while becoming more affordable over time.

Mark Alles

Mark J. Alles, CELGENE CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Celgene has long held to a set of principles used to guide our decisions about the pricing of the medicines we discover, develop and distribute worldwide. These principles reflect our commitment to patient access, obligation to provide value for patients and the health system, drive for continuing innovation for the future, and the need for flexibility. Today, we are enhancing these principles by setting forth an approach to price increases reflecting medical inflation and increased value. This approach is intended to continue to provide transparency around the value of our therapies and contribute to policy solutions that support access and affordability for patients.

First, if Celgene increases the price of any individual therapy across our portfolio, the price increase will be limited to no more than once a year and at a level no greater than the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services projected increase in National Health Expenditures for the year. For 2018, this rate is 5.3%. Because value is a guiding principle of our pricing decisions, there may be exceptional circumstances in which additional clinical or health economic evidence demonstrates a clear and significant increase in the value of one of our medicines where this standard would not apply. We believe this action will provide greater certainty for all stakeholders and contribute to limiting the growth of health care spending.

Second, we agree that transparency about value and pricing is important. Patients, healthcare professionals and policymakers are asking for more information, and we are committed to providing it. That’s why earlier this year we introduced Celgene’s first annual Value and Innovation Framework Report, offering comprehensive evidence on the value we provide to patients, the health system, the economy and society, and future innovation. We also plan to provide information related to any increases in price, including enhancements in value, at: www.celgene.com/value.

Third, we are committed to advocating for public policy solutions that will improve patient access and affordability, encourage value-based payment models, and expand competition.

Increasingly, the health care system is pushing more and more of the cost of care to patients, especially those with serious medical conditions, in the form of high deductibles and percentage-based coinsurance.3  We believe that limits on patient out-of-pocket spending will improve access and affordability and lead to greater treatment adherence, better health outcomes and lower overall health system costs. It is positive to see proposals to include a patient out-of-pocket cap in the Medicare Part D drug benefit included in the President’s Blueprint to Lower Drug Prices.4

Celgene supports value-based payment models, which, when properly designed, can provide access for patients, predictability for payers, and incentives for continued innovation by biopharmaceutical companies. The development of new and bolder value-based payment approaches can be facilitated through necessary modernization of government regulations to accommodate value-based arrangements. We applaud the Department of Health and Human Services’ interest in identifying regulatory solutions that would enable the evolution of these new payment models and ensure that access and reimbursement innovation keeps pace with medical innovation.

Finally, Celgene supports the robust balance between incentives for innovation and generic competition. The Hatch-Waxman Act has created a sustainable system where nearly 90 percent of prescriptions every year are generics, representing massive price reductions compared to the original innovator brand.5  Last year, the Food and Drug Administration approved a record-high 1,027 new generic medications.5  Between 2018 and 2022, based on anticipated loss of exclusivity, an estimated $105 billion in price decreases will be realized by the healthcare system.5  Policies that enhance competition after innovators’ patents expire drive the virtuous cycle of incentives for new innovation and the long continuing value from generic competition.

At Celgene, our long-standing purpose is to change the course of human health through bold pursuits in science and a promise to always put patients first. After spending many years and significant resources to discover and develop innovative new therapies, our greatest priority is ensuring that patients have access to them. Affordable access for patients is essential to our ability to reinvest in research and development that will lead to the next generation of treatments — and ultimately cures — for diseases that affect millions of people worldwide.



1 Blendon RJ, Benson JM, SteelFisher GK, and Weldon KJ. Report on Americans’ Views on the Quality of Health Care. Harvard School of Public Health. March 22, 2011. https://www.rwjf.org/en/library/research/2011/03/report-on-americans–views-on-the-quality-of-health-care.html?cid=XEM_807207 Accessed June 2018.
2 Consumers for Quality Care Survey Finds Americans Acutely Worried about Health Care Costs. Consumer for Quality Care. April 25, 2018. https://consumers4qualitycare.org/research/ Accessed June 2018.
3 Commercially-Insured Patients Pay Undiscounted List Prices for One In Five Brand Prescriptions, Accounting for Half of Out-of-Pocket Spending on Brand Medicines. Phrma. March 2017. http://phrma-docs.phrma.org/download.cfm?objectid=C6A51770-0FCD-11E7-ACCC0050569A4B6C Accessed June 2018
4 U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. American Patients First: The Trump Administration Blueprint to Lower Drug Prices and Reduce Out-of-Pocket Costs. May 2018. https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/AmericanPatientsFirst.pdf. Accessed June 2018.
5 Uhl K. 2017 Was Another Record-Setting Year for Generic Drugs. FDA Voice. 2018.
https://blogs.fda.gov/fdavoice/index.php/2018/02/2017-was-another-record-setting-year-for-generic-drugs/ Accessed June 2018.

By Mark J. Alles, Celgene Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

A few decades ago, drug discovery was, for the most part, a matter of trial and error. The world’s most successful pharmaceutical companies would often collect dirt from far-flung locales and screen that soil or sand for medically active components. Biology was often a secondary concern. It was the speed of trial and error that was important.

Today, drug discovery is more targeted and intentional, building on a wealth of data that has grown exponentially since the early days of trial and error. Our knowledge of cell biology and genomics is now sufficiently advanced that it is possible to create medicines based on our individual immune cells or genetic profile. These advances promise patient-tailored medicines, such as the new CAR T therapies that “train” the patient’s own immune system to fight cancer, that have the potential to transform how cancer is treated.

This kind of innovation, however, requires investment to be sustained. Both the basic science and the delivery of treatments require investment to foster the next generation of therapies. The challenge is ensuring access to and reimbursement for those new medicines, thereby enabling innovators to reinvest in research and development. This is the virtuous cycle of innovation.

Mark Alles

Mark J. ALLES, CELGENE CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


If the costs of a new intervention far exceed the benefits, or if patients cannot get access, we’ve failed – as a system – to provide value. Conversely, when we see benefits that far outstrip costs, we can be confident that we are moving the health system in a direction to higher value, with better health and lower costs.

Understanding that balance has never been more critical. The United States spends $3.3 trillion on health care every year, or 18 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP). That’s about equal to the entire GDP of Germany. Among the primary drivers of this spending are hospital care (32 percent); physician and clinical services (20 percent); retail prescription drugs (10 percent); and other health, residential, and personal care services (5 percent). We have a responsibility to make sure that those dollars are spent wisely and to define what we – as a company and as a part of the health care system – believe is a good investment in the health of the nation.

Celgene’s Value and Innovation Framework Report is an effort to help meet that responsibility. We have developed a framework that outlines our approach to value and defines our role as a driver of value.

 “We have a responsibility to define what we believe is a good investment in the health of the nation.”

Though spending on biopharmaceutical products remains a relatively small piece of the overall health care environment, the biopharmaceutical sector has had an outsized impact on outcomes, and we are proud of our role in a therapeutic revolution that has cut the cancer death rate by 25 percent since 1991. While overall spending on biopharmaceutical products has indeed increased over the years, it has contributed to significant improvements in health outcomes. In fact, one study found that over 70 percent of recent life expectancy growth is due to the increased use of medicines.

Even with the increasing innovation coming from the biopharmaceutical sector, there are signs that drug spending is stabilizing. In 2017, per-person spending on prescription drugs rose just 1.5 percent across plans covering employees and their families, less than half of the increase reported in 2016 and the lowest increase in 24 years of tracking drug-trend data. Another study found that after accounting for rebates and discounts, spending growth on prescription drugs in the United States slowed to 0.6 percent in 2017.

But we cannot simply proclaim successes, declare that we have provided value, and avoid further discussion. Instead, we must start with a clear definition of our goals and a fair-minded examination of our impact at every level of the health care system. This report is evidence of our commitment to evaluating our performance as “value drivers” so that we can continually refine our role in the virtuous cycle of innovation.

To learn more about how Celgene defines value and measures it through medical innovation, read the 2018 Value and Innovation Framework Report.

Pancreatic cancer is once again an area of focus at this year’s American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting in Chicago. New research is increasingly important as estimates show that the mortality rate of pancreatic cancer could surpass that of breast and colorectal cancers by 2030 in some countries. Celgene is at the forefront of the fight against pancreatic cancer, and at this year’s ASCO conference, new data will continue to expand our understanding of emerging investigational treatments.

Celgene continues the fight against pancreatic cancer through our commitment in advancing research, our collaboration with advocacy groups and our support to patients.

Some look. We envision.

Celgene is committed to advancing research to help change the lives of patients with pancreatic cancer. In 2017, more than 20 percent of our revenue was reinvested into R&D, one of the highest rates in the industry.

Part of our research aims to inform today’s treatment choices in pancreatic cancer. Given the availability of more treatment options for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, it is time to develop a treatment plan for patients. Celgene is contributing to this important discussion by helping physicians and patients make informed treatment decisions. With an eye toward the future, we are also conducting research and collaborating with researchers around the world on 91 ongoing investigational trials that combine novel agents with the foundation of approved Celgene therapies. These trials involve more than 40 unique novel compounds across more than 30 mechanisms of action and target enrollment of more than 4,500 pancreas cancer patients.

Celgene: Your partner in the fight against pancreatic cancer.

Some hear. We listen.

Celgene collaborates with patient advocacy groups to bring hope to the fight against pancreatic cancer. In partnership with 29 international patient groups, Celgene created the first-ever World Pancreatic Cancer Day in 2014 and continues to grow the event. Celgene also supports events such as Purple Stride Walks in the United States, the European Multi-Stakeholder platform on Pancreatic Cancer in November 2014, 2015 Pancreatic Cancer Forum in Milan and grants to help transport patients to their treatment appointments through the CancerCare GetYouThere program.

Some touch. We feel.

Celgene is dedicated to offering compassion and support to patients with pancreatic cancer and those who care for them. To help them, Celgene developed NavigatePanc.com, a personal pancreatic cancer information center. The site provides information about the disease, clinical trials, support groups, finances and communication and allows patients and caregivers to create their own online libraries of relevant information. Celgene also recognizes that pancreatic cancer patients often have special nutritional needs due to compromised pancreatic function. Our response: a source for recipes and meal planning. Lastly, we are committed to increasing the awareness of pancreatic cancer in the healthcare community.

Pancreatic Cancer: Cooking. Comfort. Care.

We support all who fight pancreatic cancer.

Celgene is committed to providing information and support to people with pancreatic cancer, and their loved ones, to help them in making informed decisions throughout their journey.

To learn more:

Last year, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy was recognized as the Advance of the Year in the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Report for its demonstrated benefits in certain blood cancers and its potential in many other tumor types. At this year’s ASCO annual meeting, the interest in CAR T cell therapy remains strong with the availability of more data for approved and investigational therapies.

“So far, the oncology community has greeted CAR T cell therapy with extraordinary enthusiasm,” said Dr. Jeremy Abramson, clinical director for the Center for Lymphoma at Massachusetts General Hospital. “We’ve had few effective treatment options for difficult-to-treat blood cancers like diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [DLBCL]. The newest data from ASCO continues to suggest that CAR T cell therapy may represent an important advance for some patients.”

DR. JEREMY ABRAMSON FROM MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL BELIEVES THAT MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT CAR T CELL THERAPIES WILL BE ADDRESSED AT THIS YEAR’S ASCO ANNUAL MEETING.

DR. JEREMY ABRAMSON FROM MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL BELIEVES THAT MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT CAR T CELL THERAPIES WILL BE ADDRESSED AT THIS YEAR’S ASCO ANNUAL MEETING.

A Long Time in the Making

The first investigational CAR T cells were developed over 30 years ago, using genetic engineering advances with the goal to reprogram a patient’s immune system to recognize and attack cancer cells. Early attempts were lackluster; the engineered T cells were slow to reproduce, died quickly and produced weak immune responses that weren’t effective at killing tumor cells.

Advances in genetic engineering tools and techniques, as well as a far better understanding of the human genome, have advanced this type of technology. Over the past five years, the number of clinical trials involving CAR T cell therapies has skyrocketed from just a handful to more than 180.

In 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first two CAR T cell therapies — one for children with relapsed or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia and another for non-Hodgkin lymphoma in adults who have failed at least two other kinds of treatment.

These are just two examples of diseases for which CAR T cell therapy represents a radically different therapeutic approach.

“CAR T cells are specifically engineered to recognize, go after and attack the cancer cells,” Abramson said.

How CAR T Cell Therapy Works

CAR T CELL THERAPY BEGINS BY REMOVING A PATIENT’S T CELLS, WHICH FIGHT INFECTIONS IN THE BODY, THROUGH A BLOOD DRAW. THOSE CELLS ARE THEN SENT TO A MANUFACTURING SITE WHERE THEY ARE GENETICALLY ENGINEERED TO RECOGNIZE AND ATTACH TO ANTIGENS EXPRESSED ON CANCER CELLS AND SOME NORMAL CELLS. PATIENTS THEN RECEIVE CHEMOTHERAPY BEFORE THESE PROGRAMMED CELLS ARE RETURNED TO THEIR BODIES TO SEEK AND ATTACK CANCER CELLS. PATIENTS ARE MONITORED FOR SIDE EFFECTS AFTER CAR T CELL THERAPY.

Exploring Questions in Blood Cancers

While the first two CAR T therapies have been approved, Abramson notes that many questions remain, including CAR T cell therapy production, safety and longevity.

Scientists are still fine-tuning the process of creating CAR T cell therapies. For instance, studies continue around different ratios of two subtypes of T cells—CD4+ and CD8+ T cells— that may behave differently. That’s because CD8+ T cells have a cancer-killing effect, while CD4+ T cells produce chemical messages that boost T cell production. Finding the right ratio of CAR T cells created from these subtypes may impact the efficacy and safety of these treatments, according to Abramson. But the clinical significance of CD4:CD8 ratio remains unknown.

“Even the most effective therapies can only be administered if the toxicities can be identified and successfully treated and reversed,” Abramson explained. “We’re continuing to learn about potential toxicities with the different approved and investigational CAR T cell therapies, and how to optimally manage and prevent them.”

We are studying ways to make these therapies work better, designing more effective CAR T cells that may target different or multiple cancer proteins and combining them with other medications.

Adverse events that have been noted in trials of CAR T cell therapy include cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity. CRS symptoms include fever, nausea, or headaches, and neurotoxicity symptoms include delirium, headaches and problems speaking. ASCO attendees will get a better understanding of the severity and timing of these and other potential safety issues as well as insight into paths for their prevention and treatment.

As for the durability of CAR T cell therapies, Abramson believes there’s work to be done.

“Less than half of patients with DLBCL who receive CAR T cell therapy are still in remission a year later,” he said. “We are studying ways to design more effective CAR T cells that may target different or multiple cancer proteins and learn how to combine them with other medications like checkpoint inhibitors or immunomodulators to see if we can enhance CAR T cell activity.”

Beyond the Blood

So far, CAR T cell therapies have only been approved for the treatment of blood cancers. The major challenge in solid tumors, such as lung and breast cancers, has been identifying a target that’s restricted to the tumor, so the CAR T cells don’t also attack the patient’s healthy cells.

CAR T cells kill healthy immune cells called B lymphocytes, for instance, as well as lymphoma cells, but patients can often do without those particular cells. But a treatment that attacked an entire organ — or organs — would have catastrophic effects.

According to Abramson, one potential way to get around the problem may be to create CAR T cells that attack only when they encounter a specific combination of targets. While a single protein might be shared by cancer and healthy cells, researchers are searching for patterns of multiple targets only found on cancer cells. Whether or not this tactic succeeds, Abramson is optimistic that scientists can find a way.

To learn more about the advances that will be discussed at ASCO 2018, read “ASCO 2018 Preview: Precision Medicine, CAR T Cells and Immunomodulators.”

Dr. Abramson is a lead principal investigator for Juno and has consultant/advisory roles with Celgene.