BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Merck Triggers The Race to Replace Cubist

Following
This article is more than 9 years old.

A real healthcare crisis has been in the works for the last half-century and it has nothing to do with the cost of healthcare, although you could argue it has something to do with the price of it.  It has everything to do with the phenomenon of antibiotic drug resistance.  Some of the best investment strategies begin with identifying an important need and filling that need. In biotech and healthcare investing, identifying crucial needs is often linked to matters of life and death, and with regard to Cubist, Merck may have hit the proverbial jackpot in the field of antibiotics and drug resistance.

Drug resistance occurs when drugs used to treat common bacterial infection become ineffective over time as bacteria evolve the more exposed they become to a drug. Overuse of antibiotics hastens this process when doctors prescribe medications improperly.  The rise of super bugs has been in the news for several years, but now has reached catastrophic levels as resistance has accelerated. For instance when Erythromycin was first introduced in the 1950s, it took decades before bacteria became resistant to it. It took a fraction of the time for Levofloxacin to become ineffective against Pneumoccoccus in the 1990s. To blunt drug resistance, our newest drugs are approved as last resort measures against deadly infections. This is one of the main reasons why it took 16 years for resistance to develop against Vancomycin. However today drug resistance outpaces our ability to develop newer, more potent drugs.

To prove the point, the FDA granted approval to 19 new drug applications for antibiotics in the early 1980s. From 2005 to 2009, that number fell to 3 new approvals. Of course, antibiotic development continued throughout this time, but as science and technology advanced in other areas, big pharma began abandoning large campuses dedicated to antibiotic programs to pursue mega revenue indications like pill a day cardiovascular and metabolic disease categories, and now they focus on drugs for oncology and rare diseases where they can charge $50,000 to $100,000 per course. Why develop antibiotic drugs that patients only take for 7 to 14 days that you can only charge in the thousands when you can produce blockbusters like Lipitor, Plavix, and Viagra?

For all of these reasons, today’s announcement of Merck’s acquisition of Cubist is completely unsurprising and uninspired, especially if you’re one of the savvy investors who wisely invested in the antibiotic space.

It was 18 months ago that I wrote about the antibiotic issue in this publication.  At the time I was advocating for greater investment in biotechs developing new antibiotics like Trius Therapeutics and Cempra Pharmaceuticals. Since that article, not only were Trius and Optimer Pharmacueticals (another antibiotic company) acquired in 2013 by Cubist in a rollup for $1.6 billion, but just last month Durata Therapeutics was acquired by Actavis for $675 million. Durata commercialized Dalvance, an IV antibiotic treatment for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Most recently, it was reported that Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals was exploring options after "takeover interest." Tetraphase is developing a more potent version of tetracycline, an important antibiotic drug that was introduced in the 1950s, but developed resistance in Shigella before that decade was even over.  That leaves Cempra  as one of the last freestanding small biotechnology companies developing critical antibiotics.

Analyzing the pattern of transactions over the course of the last 18 months, it was a foregone conclusion that Cubist would be an acquisition target. Cubist, a consolidator of societally and medically important drugs, is a perfect candidate in a pharma landscape populated by cash rich, R&D poor behemoths. Merck just purchased the antibiotic franchise it couldn’t develop on its own and can now drop into the rest of its product portfolio. The backbreaking development work, however, occurs at smaller, mid-stage biotech companies rarely valued correctly by the market. In fact Cubist was a middling biotech when Lily gave up on an internal drug program for a product now known as Cubicin. Cubist picked up the failed asset, proved it worked, and commercialized it successfully into the  franchise Merck is now purchasing for $9.5BN. Now that Tetraphase may be pondering an exit the question remains: Who will rise to replace Cubist? The answer may very well be Cempra, the North Carolina based antibiotic company with trial data anticipated next quarter.