[Reporter’s Notebook] Genome & Company refused to disclose indications after technology transfer. Why?

SAN DIEGO, Calif. —  By Kim Chan-hyuk/Korea Biomedical Review correspondent — Genome & Company recently drew keen attention by transferring its new drug candidate, GENA-111, to Swiss pharmaceutical company Debiopharm.

Although it was Genome & Company’s first technology transfer in the field of new targeted anticancer drugs, the contract amount reached 586 billion won ($428.8 million).

That also explains why Genome & Company’s news conference for the Korean media at the BIO International Convention 2024 (BIO USA) on Tuesday (local time) attracted a lot of attention.

The press conference was expected to provide detailed information on the purpose and background of the technology transfer, its expected effects, and future development plans. Such expectations rose further because Debiopharm CEO Bertrand Ducrey and CSO Frederic Levy were directly involved in the technology transfer.

Genome & Company also said it would hold a “joint news conference” with DebioPharm, which will be completed with a Q&A session with representatives from companies and researchers.

However, the news conference did not meet expectations, and Genome & Company’s opaque response only raised questions.

The question was about GENA-111’s indications. Debiopharm said that GENA-111 has shown efficacy in animal models of the targeted cancers through collaborative research with Genome & Company. It also said that some target indications are cancers not treated with targeted therapies, including ADCs (antibody-drug conjugates).

Asked about GENA-111’s indications, Debiopharm CSO Frederick Levy briefly explained, “I can’t disclose specific (indication) cancers, but broadly speaking, one gynecologic cancer and one hormone-related cancer are targeted.”

However, at a news conference held by Genome & Company in Korea in August last year with the presence of Co-CEO Hong Yoo-seok, the company revealed that GENA-111’s primary indication is ovarian cancer, leading some analysts to speculate that the company is trying to develop it as a third-line treatment for ovarian cancer after AbbVie’s ADC ovarian cancer drug Elahere (mirvetuximab soravtansine).

In other words, the indication for GENA-111 could be interpreted differently from Genome & Company’s intention. Naturally, questions about the indication were raised once again. However, Genome & Company stopped interpretation and provided no further information, stating that “Debiopharm has made comprehensive disclosures.”

Given that GENA-111’s indications have already been disclosed in Korea, the company’s attitude raised questions. Furthermore, Genome & Company said it would hold a separate news conference in Korea to answer the question. However, this could also be interpreted as an intention to disclose the indication outside the partner’s earshot, adding to the confusion.

That also may raise questions about whether Genome & Company disclosed the indication without discussing it with its collaborative research partner, Debiopharm.

Ironically, during the new conference, Debiopharm CSO Levy emphasized that he was very impressed with Genome & Company’s research attitude, so he chose Genome & Company as a technology transfer partner.

Genome & Company must fully understand the importance of being transparent with investors and stakeholders about the progress and indications at each stage of drug development. That made the company’s attitude at the news conference all the more disappointing.

Moreover, the company advertises GENA-111 as a new global drug. To gain trust in the global market, it should not hesitate to correct conflicting information.