About ERIX
EiRx Therapeutics is a specialist provider of pre-clinical therapeutics to the pharmaceutical industry. Our unique scientific expertise and knowledge in the field of Apoptosis provide a sound base to discover and develop new medicines that will safely and selectively repair this natural process in disease. The potential benefits from these new medicines are enormous, since as many as 70% of all human disease have some defect in the control of Apoptosis.
Apoptosis - the biological process that determines whether cells in our bodies live or die...
http://www.eirx.com/index.html

Purchased some of these on the strength of the PROGRESS UPDATE looks promising.
http://moneyam.uk-wire.com/cgi-bin/articles/200603200701130254A.html

ERX interview with John Pool
http://www.wallstreetreporter.com/interview.php?id=18589&player=real
Latest News
CANCER COLLABORATION WITH BIOMERIEUX SA
http://moneyam.uk-wire.com/cgi-bin/articles/200607120700230534G.html
Biomerieux Web Site
http://www.biomerieux.com/servlet/srt/bio/portail/home
ABOUT ERX Focus Of The Month
http://www.billamag.net/focus-document-text.asp?FocusTextID=1
ERX pdf filehttp://www.eirx.com/eirx_heading_images/Yokohama2005.pdf
19/09/2006 A 50% reduction in breast tumour volume size seen with Eirx lead molecule in animal studies
http://moneyam.uk-wire.com/cgi-bin/articles/200609190700171175J.html

Past and present collaborative partners include:

* bioMieux SA
* Almac Diagnostics Ltd
* Merck & Co, Ltd
* Biofocus plc
* MGI Pharmaceuticals, Inc
* OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc
* Sareum plc
* Regen Therapeutics plc
* SR Pharma plc

Another Week, Another Takeover

Genentech (DNA) announced this morning the acquisition of Tanox (TNOX) for $919 mln in cash, a nice premium to yesterdays close.

One a week is all I ask.

Takeovers as a driver of the biotech sector valuation have been a theme of mine for some time long enough, in fact, that I sometimes feel like a stopped watch every time I write about it. I freely admit I didnt see pharmas acquisition spree in the private sector lasting as long as it did, nor did I believe that the disconnect between high private valuations and low public valuations would be so persistent. Now that the private sector is picked clean, its the turn of the public biotechs to see their valuations catch up.

I particularly pounded the table on biotech acquisitions around this time last year. The driver was new FASB acquisition accounting rules that create much less favorable accounting policies for drug company acquisitions of biotechs. In December 2005, however, FASB postponed the implementation date of the program. I opined at the time that this would push acquisitions into late 2006 and early 2007, presuming the expected effective date of the new rules to be year end 2007.

Were there now, so lets see if this early trickle of public acquisitions turns into a flood.

Revolving Door Biotech Portfolio Managers

The portfolio manager (PM) position at some funds is something of a revolving door particularly for sector PMs within larger macro funds. The door has been spinning particularly fast lately for biotech PMs. It has been a tough year for most biotech hedge funds as even those who are making money have been feeling a little overwhelmed by all the crosscurrents.

Short-siders are starting to get blind-sided by these acquisitions. Take these three recent acquisitions:



(I include the open call interest to reinforce what Ive written recently concerning short interest in the biotech sector specifically, it is very rare to find open options interest that correlates to the short interest number.)

Even if we assume all the open call interest was owned by those short the stock, which is unlikely in this sector, these deal announcements caused some migraines at a few funds. It's more likely the pain of the acquisition is magnified since biotech short sellers tend to be call sellers, too.

Any acquisition frenzy in a small sector like this feeds on itself. Speculators start moving in to see if they can pick the next takeout. Short sellers get nervous and start covering. Market caps rise, pushing prices paid higher. Rinse and repeat. It is a great deal of fun if youre long. Not so much if youre not.

When the process starts to really heat up, 100% acquisitions are replaced by big equity purchases at prices well above current market cap. For example, a company will come in and buy 19.9% of a target (keeping them off their balance sheets) for 3-5 times the current trading price of the target. Sometimes these deals come with a purchase option. Other times they dont. Youll see these deals about 3/4 of the way to the top of the cycle.

Whats at the top? The tippy-top is probably the second or third company that announces it is raising umpteen billion via a public offering to roll up small biotech companies. Theres a lot of money to be made when this nonsense starts happening, but your trigger finger needs to be pretty itchy.

Random Thoughts


It is not enough as an investor to simply acknowledge the Democrats' majority in Congress is likely to be bad for pharma companies. You have to (a) understand exactly how; and (b) figure out how to profit from it aside from the obvious shorting. The proposed rules will hit the blockbuster drugs sold through family physicians the hardest. Knowing pharma management realizes this and wont sit idly by while their sales and EPS plummet, you should start thinking about what drugs can replace the blockbusters. Drugs sold through specialists like cancer drugs and especially orphan indications are those most likely to be insulated from the worst of any regulations. Pharma has to go out and acquire these drugs. They dont own them now because the drugs dont fit their blockbuster mentality. Where do they find them? Small biotech companies.


The JP Morgan Healthcare Conference is Jan 8-11. Mark this down as it traditionally kicks off the biotech buying season. Remember the seasonal saw: Buy JP Morgan (JPM), sell ASCO.


In case my point in the blurb about Congress, pharma and blockbuster drugs was unclear, I dont think a Democratic majority in Congress is bad for biotech. Different? Yes. Bad for some companies? Particularly those intending to create mass-market lifestyle drugs. Net positive for the sector, though? I think so, but we wont know for certain until we see what the PDUFA-4 (Prescription Drug Fee User Act) proposals look like.


My firm lost the net connection in our office yesterday. We had a low-bandwidth wireless connection to a couple of laptops to keep us from going mad. It was disarmingly peaceful and productive in what has otherwise been a nutso week.


Its been interesting reading the comments on a piece I wrote saying Dendreons (DNDN) FDA panel early next year might be a pivot point for the sector. I opined a few weeks ago that a positive outcome to the panel might be as beneficial to the bulls as a negative panel outcome was to bears in the spring of 2004. This could be a considerable catalyst.


PDUFA-4? The regulatory framework of the FDA in terms of timing and user fees is memorialized in the Prescription Drug Fee User Act PDUFA. The first of these was signed last decade and they renew every three years. The reason I can be so confident that changes to the industry are coming is that PDUFA-3 expires September 30, 2007. It has to be renewed or else the FDA loses over 50% of its current budget.

Not too late StarFrog; if the rumours are right then both shares are dirt cheap at present!!
kim

True, Kim. Musing on the thought as I type.

An insatiable appetite

Driven by their ability to produce low-cost, generic drugs, Indias pharmaceutical companies have been notching up acquisitions abroad in this space

C JAYANTHI
Posted online: Saturday, November 11, 2006 at 0000 hours IST




Insatiable: that word sums up the appetite of Indias pharma majors for footprint, markets and new products. According to a FICCI study, between 2000 and 2006, 62 companies in the healthcare and pharmaceutical sector abroad were acquired by Indian companies.
The most recent target for acquisition was the Minnesota-based US branded generic player 3Ms pharmaceutical business which was on the block for several months and is now being sold to Graceway Pharmaceuticals Inc, Meda AB and Ironbridge Capital and Archer Capital for $ 2.1 billion. A spokesperson for Ranbaxy, Indias largest pharmaceutical firm with $ 1. 17 billion in revenues in 2005, while denying ever being in the race to acquire 3Ms pharma business-known for its cancer drugs- says: The fact happens to be that the company has been on the block for seven or eight months. The price at which the company has been valued is very high.



Acquisitions have been a part of the growth strategy for Dr Reddys Laboratories, which expects to become a billion-dollar company by March 2008, after the recent acquisition of Germanys Betapharm Arzeneimittal for $ 570 million. Says Habil Khorakiwala, chairman, Wockhardt Ltd., The takeovers reflect the freedom to operate in the global space. Indian corporates are showing traditional risk-taking ability along with the confidence to take on global opportunities. Wockhardt which has acquired three European drug companies in the recent pastWallis, CP Pharma, Esparmahas recently acquired Pinewood (2006) for $ 150 million and today Europe contributes half of Wockhardts annual sales amounting to $325 mn in 2005.

What makes acquisitions imperative for drug companies is that new drugs are expensive to develop. Says the Ranbaxy spokesperson: The US happens to be our single largest market for exports. About 24%-25% of our sales come from the US. We are interested in inorganic growth as well as evaluating targets around the world including markets in the US, Europe and in India. In 2006, for instance, Ranbaxy acquired a 100% stake in Ethimed NV Belgium for an undisclosed amount. It has over 20 product registrations and is ranked 10th among generics companies in Belgium. This gives Ranbaxy access to Benelux countries.

It was the Congress government in the late1970s that changed the fortunes of drug companies dramatically, by accepting process patents, rather than product patents. Says Utkarsh Palnitkar, national industry leader, health science, Ernst & Young, This however killed innovation. India has the largest US FDA-approved drug-manufacturing plants outside of the US, which means drugs manufactured here can be freely sold in the US as they meet quality standards there. This also keeps manufacturing prowess back in India. In the generic market, volumes are critical as profit margins are lower. Thus Nicolas Piramal has more than 3,500 medical representatives in the country (apart from a few FDA approved drug manufacturing plants), which goes a long way in the distribution of drugs. Companies like Ranbaxy, Dr Reddys and Glenmark have started investing in the discovery of new molecules. However, between discovery, clinical trails and marketing, the costs are enormous. Overseas acquisitions help Indian companies share the burden of developing new drugs.

According to a FICCI study on India Incs acquisitions abroad (August 2006) between 2000 and 2006, five companies including Ranbaxy, Dr Reddys Laboratories, Nicolas Piramal, Sun Pharma and Glenmark Pharma account for 30 acquisitions out of the 62 companies that have been acquired. As a region, Europe has seen the largest number of acquisitions - 36, by Indian companies followed by the US, where 17 companies have been acquired. Says Saroj Kumar Poddar, FICCI president: The manufacturing cost of drugs in India is very competitive. Acquiring a company abroad adds value, broadens your product base and brings access to new markets. Today money is available, so acquisitions are easier.

In a poor country like India, generic drugs that are off patent, lower the cost of medicines that are available in the market. New acquisitions accelerate growth. About 20% of global generic drugs in volume is manufactured in India. It was only in 2005 that the patent regime for innovator drugs (product patents) was tightened under the amended Patent Act 2005 under the WTO regulations. Indian companies have started investing in R&D for new molecules only in the last 5 years.

buying increasing, I bet we break 40 today easily, weekend press as well..

1p monday

Ivanhoe Newswire


(Ivanhoe Newswire) -- An experimental vaccine may help colorectal cancer patients battle the disease.

British researchers developed the vaccine, which helps stimulate cancer patients' immune systems to fight cancerous cells.

"This is the first vaccine shown to stimulate TNF-alpha -- an immune system protein that is very effective at killing cancer cells," says senior author Professor Lindy Durrant, from the University of Nottingham in England.

Researchers studied 67 colorectal cancer patients who were an average of 66 years old. Results reveal when the patients received the vaccine before and after surgery to remove cancerous tumors, it helped stimulate immune cell production in up to 70 percent of the patients.

Durrant says the antibody in the vaccine -- called 105AD7 -- was cloned from a patient who survived seven years with colorectal cancer that had spread to the liver.

"This is very unusual, as most patients die within one year of getting liver metastases," reported Durrant. "I thought if this antibody had helped this patient if we could clone it -- it might help others."

Patients were immunized before surgery on the day they started the study and again two weeks later if they had not had the surgery yet. The vaccines were also given at three, six, and 12 weeks after surgery, then at three monthly intervals for up to two years. Lab tests show most of the patients had a T-cell response against the vaccine.

This article was reported by Ivanhoe.com, who offers Medical Alerts by e-mail every day of the week. To subscribe, go to: http://www.ivanhoe.com/newsalert/.

SOURCE: Clinical Cancer Research, 2006;12

we have been tipped in the star too..

independant and times may do an article at the weekend over takeover

PH
I did spot that article in the Morning Star, MP flags up DNA profiling issues Im sure thats got some thing to do with ERX.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index2.php/ex/examples

Big pharma cash keeps biotech on a roll

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=stocksNews&storyID=2006-11-17T143123Z_01_NOA744664_RTRUKOC_0_HEALTH-BIOTECH-MA.xml&WTmodLoc=HP-C6-Shares-3

"Big pharma is investing at an earlier stage," said Smith of SV Life Sciences. "The days of a platform (technology) company being non-investable are now gone."

I have to say, I really like that bit Driver!

So what's going to happen next week d'you think PH?
kim

I think the world should be a better place! Oh no that's PH's beauty queen speech!

A couple of weeks ago I was researching the link between BillamAG and ZYZ and ERX after spotting that the two companies held each others share's I gave up and thought no more about it untill.


A post from the other side courtesy of Mike111D

John Pool who is the chairman of ERX was previously chairman of ZYZ and currently serves there as a non exec.

I believe that ZYZ reduced their holding in ERX to fund their increased stake in Nice Tech Ltd. I do not know what holding ZYZ retain in ERX but this could still be up to 70m shares.

The chair of ZYZ is Duncan Lipscombe who also serves as a non exec for PYC, a company which in turn is also chaired by John Pool.

Duncan Lipscombe also serves as a director at Nice Tech Ltd, the company which ZYZ have been increasing their holdings in.

The parent company of ERX is Eirx Pharma Ltd, which was formed by the merger of Eirx Therapeutics, Physiomics and Cudos. This merger being brought about by Billam AG. Check the following link for details:

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2002/12/15/story343783528.asp

There are two Billams companies with indirect interests in ERX via Eirx Pharma Ltd, details as follows:

BillamAG http://www.billamag.net/index.asp

Billam PLC -http://www.billamplc.co.uk/index.html
The following RNS going back to 2004 may also be of help:
http://www.eirx.com/eirx%5Fpages/

I believe that Billam PLC may still have a small direct interest in ERX and out of interest BillamAG also hold 20.8% of ZYZ.

FWIW, my assessment is that there has been some rearranging of the furniture taking place in recent weeks which should soon come to light. This being consistent with the fact that I have been advised that various options on the M&A front have and presumably remain under review.

I have gone into some detail above to provide an insight into the connections between the various companies / board members. I hope that you find it helpful.

Thanks Driver an interesting bed of interwoven connections.
I couldn,t get the last link to work but next week may be interesting.
Last week I was averaging 6 good blues a day so fingers crossed for this to make my year!
Just leave the tax man as a delightful worry!

I'm not sure that they are two separate companies as Mike says but the two links below show the interest in ERX.
http://www.billamplc.co.uk/investeecompanyn.html

http://www.billamag.net/list-quoted.asp

Institutional investors are pressuring GSK to use the mountain of spare cash on its balance sheet to make acquisitions and to bolster its pipeline of new drugs.

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article1996219.ece

SAR Going well Rns out : )

White paper presented at the RNAi for Functional Analysis and Target Validation
Conference in Boston on 9-12 Nov 2004 run by the Cambridge Healthtech Institute in
the US.
The Importance of siRNA Delivery in Cancer Target Validation
It is estimated that an additional 5,000-10,000 new potential drug targets for various diseases will emerge
as a result of the sequencing of the human genome. Given the expense of drug development (approx. $800
million to bring a therapeutic to market), functional drug target validation represents one of the most
important steps in the Drug Discovery pipeline and, as such, requires an efficient, meaningful and highthroughput
evaluation system.
In the past, time consuming genetic approaches such as gene disruption by homologous recombination and
forward genetic mutagenesis strategies were used. Nucleic acid-based approaches that act to silence gene
expression, in particular Antisense Technology seemed to provide a sequence specific, broadly applicable,
time and cost effective alternatives. While Antisense has made some impact on both target validation and
therapeutics, there are several major technical issues that have prevented its widespread application.
The discovery of siRNA in 2001 revolutionized target validation with its clear potential to overcome the
shortcomings of Antisense Technology as described below:
Design: While it is estimated that only 1/8 of Antisense Oligonucleotides (ODNs) are functional,
guidelines in reviews, web sites and commercial algorithms have facilitated relatively easy selection of
functional siRNA sequences.
Stability: In comparison to ODNs, chemically synthesized siRNAs are generally stable in cell lines for up
to 6 generations allowing adequate time for phenotypic evaluations. Endogenous expression of siRNA
molecules from plasmid and viral vectors allows for longer-term analysis.
Toxicity: The high non-specific toxicity associated with ODNs is also believed to be alleviated by the use
of siRNAs as they are functional at very low doses, reducing the possibility of non-specific protein
binding, potential off-target effects and associated toxic side effects. The investigation of several target
specific siRNAs and Missense siRNAs further confirms specificity of the response.
Delivery: Although electroporation is occasionally used, the most commonly used methods for delivery
of charged nucleic acids (including ODNs, ribozymes and siRNAs) are liposomes, polymers and charged
lipids. However protocols generally need to be individually optimized for the efficient delivery of nucleic
acids into different cell lines. In fact, some siRNA transfection reagent suppliers offer kits to establish and
optimize siRNA mediated gene silencing in a new cell line of interest. The necessity of initially
optimizing transfection conditions for each individual cell line in a cancer cell panel, and then having to
run all these different protocols for each target makes high throughput target validation very challenging.
In essence, efficiency of transfection and adaptability of the method constitute the key criteria for the
development of a successful high throughput siRNA delivery system to enable Cancer Target Validation.
Transfection efficiency
Transfection efficiency encompasses several requisites: Universal delivery of siRNAs to a large panel of
cancer cell lines under the same transfection conditions, including adherent and suspension cells. This
would enable evaluation of target knockdown in cell lines representative of the major cancer types,
including the top 8 solid tumors (namely lung, colon, breast, prostate, ovarian, melanoma, gastrointestinal
and liver) as well as leukemias and lymphomas thus facilitating identification of targets that selectively
kill particular tumor types while having no effect on others as well as those that destroy a broad spectrum
of cancer cell types. Transfection of the majority of cells in a population (ie. high transfection rate) is
paramount to long-term cell based assays, as a low transfection rate causes the dilution of the siRNA
effect giving error-prone and difficult to evaluate results. High levels of siRNA transfected per cell allow
for maximum target knockdown by the siRNA in each cell. Any toxicity inherent in the reagent or
protocol would increase the base line of an assay and so make analysis of results of toxicity assays more
difficult to interpret, therefore minimal toxicity associated with transfection reagent and protocol is vital.
High reproducibility would confer credibility on results and allow for comparisons between subsequent
validation experiments and projects.
Adaptability
A quick transfection protocol adaptable to high through put format, eg. 96 well plates, and potentially
automated systems, would enable the simultaneous evaluation of a target in a panel of cell lines or several
targets in a particular cancer cell line or cancer type (encompassing several cell lines) as well as various
controls. Adaptability of the transfection system to a wide range of functional and phenotypic assays
would be vital to the characterization and complete validation of each cancer target. Such validation
requires analysis in a panel of functional assays including short term viability assays using Alamar Blue,
MTT or WST1; long term viability assays (up to 14 days) such as clonagenicity assays; apoptosis assays
including DNA fragmentation (analysis of subG1 populations), cell morphology (size/granulation),
phosphatidyl serine exposure (Annexin/propidium iodide) and mitochondrial membrane depolarization
(JC1). Cancer phenotype assays would include anchorage dependent (in soft agar) and anchorage
independent clonagenicity assays and Boyden chamber migration assays. The majority of these assays are
adaptable to a rapid throughput format with the latter phenotypic assays adaptable to 96 well plate
analysis.
Cancer Target Validation
EiRx Therapeutics Plc. has developed an siRNA delivery system that satisfies all the above criteria to
create a high through put Cancer Target Validation Platform. This has facilitated in-house validation of
more than 100 potential apoptosis modulating anti-cancer targets to date.
The establishment of such efficient siRNA delivery systems is essential to the rapid development and
worldwide use of siRNA-based target validation. Such siRNA delivery processes can be adapted to in vivo
and explant models and can also be adapted to other disease indications. The potential value of such
systems are apparent given the recent prospective figures for the 2010 world RNAi market published by
Frost and Sullivan, UK (World RNAi markets: Current and Future Outlook): it is expected to grow from
an estimated $48 million in 2003 to $328 million in 2010, with almost 50% of that figure ($146.4 million)
being target validation.

could break 40 today.. looks promissing, shares mag should do something on this

about to tick up again.. bleeding heck, it might just happen today

Notable milestones in 2004/5 include:

* flotation on AIM
* licensing of 4 cancer drug targets to OSI Pharmaceuticals, in a deal worth
up to $18.8M depending on results
* collaboration with structure-based drug discovery company Sareum plc, to
advance EiRx kinase targets to Phase I/II clinical trials
* acquisition of oncology company Auvation Ltd
* collaborative research agreement with Merck & Co. Inc. to evaluate EiRx's
siRNA delivery technology
* award of a Marie Curie Programme grant from the European Commission, to
support development of the company's screening, chemistry and efficacy
testing capabilities



Potential new therapies for colorectal and other cancers



A grant from the Marie Curie Programme helped fund the development of EiRx's
EnPAD(TM) technology, which has been designed to identify novel drug candidates
targeted against specific biological pathways. Using its EnPAD(TM) technology
together with its ALIBI(TM) platform, EiRx's scientists have discovered a series
of related compounds with selective activity against transformed cell types
including colorectal and breast cancer cell lines. The company has submitted
patent applications to protect these novel therapeutic candidates in key global
markets.