In the race to develop an Ebola vaccine, little NewLink Genetics has
been in the shadow of pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).
Both companies have rushed experimental vaccines into small, early-stage trials. Hopes are high that the vaccines can be ready for large efficacy trials in hard-hit West Africa in January and if they work, for real-world use in the spring.
GSK’s efforts have received extensive media attention, and, with its substantial manufacturing capacity and experience, the mammoth U.K.-based company is widely assumed to be in the lead.
In contrast, NewLink, a cancer drug company based in Ames, Iowa, with just 120 employees, has until recently avoided media coverage and drawn criticism for delaying the launch of its studies.
But a different picture emerged after NewLink broke its media silence following a high-level meeting on Ebola vaccines held by the World Health Organization on 23 October.
At the meeting, NewLink executives said that, under a best-case scenario, the company might have 12 million doses of vaccine by April. That number would far outstrip GSK’s estimate of 230,000 doses by that date.
There are many caveats. If NewLink’s vaccine requires a high dose to be effective, far fewer people could be immunized. And NewLink’s vaccine, which combines an Ebola gene with a weakened vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a livestock pathogen, poses unique risks.
NewLink CEO Charles Link Jr., an oncologist who previously worked at the National Cancer Institute, spoke with Science about the charges of delay and why he is optimistic about the higher projections. This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
Q: You recently completed a $1 billion deal with Genentech to develop a cancer immunotherapy. Did those negotiations delay work on the Ebola vaccine and influence your decision to avoid media?
A: I really don’t feel there were any delays. Things are moving so quickly that we’re right on the edge of moving too quickly.
There’s a huge push and pull between wanting to do the right thing for humanity and needing to do things safely, scientifically, and ethically in healthy volunteers who are receiving the vaccine. Our view was we didn’t want to hype anything.
We just wanted to work on the project. Ebola came first, [the Genentech] negotiation came second, and PR came third. We’ve been trying to play it low-key, but it’s difficult to play it low-key with all this attention.
Q: You licensed the vaccine from the Canadian government for a mere $200,000. Although you have received small contracts from the U.S. government to develop the vaccine, did you have trouble getting substantial funding to support the Ebola program? CONTINUE READING
SCIENCEMAG NEWS
Both companies have rushed experimental vaccines into small, early-stage trials. Hopes are high that the vaccines can be ready for large efficacy trials in hard-hit West Africa in January and if they work, for real-world use in the spring.
GSK’s efforts have received extensive media attention, and, with its substantial manufacturing capacity and experience, the mammoth U.K.-based company is widely assumed to be in the lead.
In contrast, NewLink, a cancer drug company based in Ames, Iowa, with just 120 employees, has until recently avoided media coverage and drawn criticism for delaying the launch of its studies.
But a different picture emerged after NewLink broke its media silence following a high-level meeting on Ebola vaccines held by the World Health Organization on 23 October.
At the meeting, NewLink executives said that, under a best-case scenario, the company might have 12 million doses of vaccine by April. That number would far outstrip GSK’s estimate of 230,000 doses by that date.
There are many caveats. If NewLink’s vaccine requires a high dose to be effective, far fewer people could be immunized. And NewLink’s vaccine, which combines an Ebola gene with a weakened vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a livestock pathogen, poses unique risks.
NewLink CEO Charles Link Jr., an oncologist who previously worked at the National Cancer Institute, spoke with Science about the charges of delay and why he is optimistic about the higher projections. This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
Q: You recently completed a $1 billion deal with Genentech to develop a cancer immunotherapy. Did those negotiations delay work on the Ebola vaccine and influence your decision to avoid media?
A: I really don’t feel there were any delays. Things are moving so quickly that we’re right on the edge of moving too quickly.
There’s a huge push and pull between wanting to do the right thing for humanity and needing to do things safely, scientifically, and ethically in healthy volunteers who are receiving the vaccine. Our view was we didn’t want to hype anything.
We just wanted to work on the project. Ebola came first, [the Genentech] negotiation came second, and PR came third. We’ve been trying to play it low-key, but it’s difficult to play it low-key with all this attention.
Q: You licensed the vaccine from the Canadian government for a mere $200,000. Although you have received small contracts from the U.S. government to develop the vaccine, did you have trouble getting substantial funding to support the Ebola program? CONTINUE READING
SCIENCEMAG NEWS
0 comments:
Post a Comment