Pages

Showing posts with label GHDX. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GHDX. Show all posts

Sunday, January 20, 2013

InVitae, Led by Randy Scott, Goes ‘All-in’ For Genomic Diagnostics

Very, very cool new venture. I like their approach, and like the fact that the GHDX folks are both recycling and extending.....

InVitae, Led by Randy Scott, Goes 'All-in' For Genomic Diagnostics

by Luke Timmerman, xconomy.com
January 18th 2013

Follow @ldtimmerman
You could call Randy Scott an E.F. Hutton for the genomics business. People listen when the co-founder and former CEO of Genomic Health talks. And Scott isn't just talking. He's gone "all-in," putting his time, and a significant amount of his own money, into a new San Francisco company called InVitae. The plan is to develop a kind of dream diagnostic test that would have been quite unrealistic a couple years ago.

"We want to aggregate all the world's genetic tests into a single assay, for less than the cost of a single assay today," Scott says. He adds: "It's kind of outrageous, but it's eminently doable."
InVitae—which is Latin for "in-life" and pronounced In-VEE-tay—has stayed stealthy in its early days. But that's changing this year, as the company has gotten certified to run a central diagnostics lab and it's gearing up for its initial commercial push.

The company, which combined assets last year from Redwood City, CA-based Genomic Health (NASDAQ: GHDX) and Locus Development, has pulled in $37 million to date from investors that include Genomic Health, Thomas McNerney & Partners, and Scott himself. Scott started moving in this direction back in February, when Genomic Health formed InVitae as a new subsidiary with him as CEO. Six months later, in August, he jumped ship completely for the new company, resigning his Genomic Health board seat. InVitae, which took in $30 million of investment in November, has grown quickly to assemble a team of 40 employees.

"Having done startups before, I'm a big believer that you've got to be all-in," Scott says. "If you want to start something from scratch and compete in today's world of healthcare, it should consume 150 percent of your time."

The goal of InVitae, in its early days, is to help geneticists to look broadly for rare, inherited genetic disorders (aka Mendelian disorders). There are thought to be about 1,500 of these rare conditions, which are often hard to diagnose. Sometimes these diseases prompt what Scott calls "medical odysseys" and are only diagnosed after physicians take stabs in the dark by running existing single-gene or multi-gene tests that can only answer narrow questions, and cost several hundred dollars apiece.
InVitae's plan is to start small, and build from there. While the usefulness of information from consumer-oriented genetics companies (23andMe, Navigenics) has long been questioned in the medical community, InVitae has instead focused on looking for the small number of genetic abnormalities and variations that are clearly linked to a disease that physicians treat.

InVitae can't yet run a comprehensive screen of all 1,500 Mendelian disorders, and deliver a report that definitely says whether a patient has one. It has spent its early days establishing a central diagnostics lab, equipped with Illumina sequencing machines, and combing through publicly available scientific literature to find the strongest links between genetic abnormalities and medical disorders. So far, for the small group of beta customers, the test can scan for 150 of those disorders, at a price of $1,500. If a physician wants to ask a narrower question—like whether a patient has one of the many genetic variations that lead to cystic fibrosis—the sequencing service and price can be tailored accordingly, Scott says. The samples get sent in to InVitae's lab, and a report comes back to the physician a few days later.

While a huge amount of information on these gene-disease links is in the public domain, it's full of conflicting information, and isn't curated. Just going through the public literature to try to find the valuable links between genomic abnormality and disease is a daunting task.

"What's happened historically is kind of a tragedy of the commons," Scott says. "People put all the variants they study into the public domain, but nobody curates it, cleans it up." The InVitae team, in doing the curation, has found "enormous errors" that it is weeding out of its central database. The variants in the InVitae database are ones that, Scott says, "accurately predict disease."

The time is right for such a test, Scott says, because physicians are becoming increasingly interested in not just single-gene or multi-gene diagnostics, but broader genomic tools that can aid in medical diagnosis. Over time, as sequencing gets even cheaper and more scientific links between gene variants and disease are established, InVitae hopes to cast a wider net. In the near future, InVitae hopes to make a single test that scans for all 1,500 known inherited (Mendelian) genetic disorders, and either rules them in or out for an individual patient.

Further in the future—maybe 10 or 20 years, in Scott's view—newborns will get their full genomes sequenced to look not just for clear inherited disorders, but to delve into predispositions and likelihoods of developing complex diseases that involve multiple genes and environmental factors. Many of these conditions could be spotted early, and managed, long before they start manifesting themselves through mysterious symptoms later in life, Scott says. Disorders like Klinefelter's syndrome, and hemochromatosis—a common iron-overload condition—can be detected today, but often aren't, because there's rarely an obvious reason to look. But InVitae expects that its tests will be able to routinely spot those disorders during its sweeping tests, and those findings could help physicians successfully treat the condition early in life before symptoms cause trouble.

"One of the goals for InVitae is to help manage your genome for life, and do it in a medically oriented way," Scott says.

Dietrich Stephan, the founder and CEO of SVBio, another aspiring "clinical genomics" entrepreneur, says he's closely tracking the competition and knows that InVitae has hired a number of experienced people from his previous company, Navigenics. His company is also looking at Mendelian disorders as the first of many genomic diagnostic opportunities.

"I have the highest regard and respect for Randy. I'm looking at it as validating what we're doing," Stephan says. "There's plenty of room in the market for more than one company. Physicians are starved for this."

The business at InVitae is quite different from Genomic Health, which markets specific diagnostic tests for breast and colon cancer. Those tests must be built on a basis of company-sponsored clinical trials that demonstrate the value of the test for both physicians and payers. By leaning on well-scrubbed, publicly available data from studies of gene variants and rare disorders, InVitae doesn't need to run lots of expensive clinical trials on its own, Scott says.

The concept for InVitae isn't actually that new—it was one of the earliest ideas that Scott flirted with back in 2000, in the founding days of Genomic Health. The concept was about what he calls the combination of "Moore's Law, Metcalfe's Law, and the law of finite genomes."

Back then, he saw DNA sequencing tools were on track to get exponentially better, faster and cheaper. The tools would create a flood of DNA data, which isn't worth much in isolation, but which could be much more valuable when widely shared and compared. The opportunity would someday be within reach, because there are only so many genes and mutations to study that will be really useful for healthcare.

For years, Scott worked on it before concluding that the technology needed to get better. "It was much too early."

That's changed now, as instrument makers are racing to develop technology that can sequence entire human genomes for $1,000, in as little as one day. Genomic Health saw the opportunity, invested some in it for a while, but spun it out as the company has other priorities going with specific tests for breast, colon, and prostate cancer.

The market opportunity for something like InVitae could be in the "many billions," Scott says. Mendelian diseases are one place to start, but even bigger markets could emerge in scouring the genome for cancer. Cambridge, MA-based Foundation Medicine has gotten off to a fast start, and recently attracted an investment from Bill Gates for a genomic test that looks for abnormalities in 200 different cancer-related genes. While Foundation looks for so-called somatic mutations that arise in tumor samples later in life, InVitae envisions looking broadly at the genome for inherited variants that are thought to raise the risk of cancer, Scott says.

How big the various genomic diagnostic markets could be is still anybody's guess, but Genomic Health alone makes more than $200 million a year, largely off one specific test for breast cancer recurrence. The underlying sequencing technology continues to get faster and cheaper, making it possible for scientists to ask more and more questions that enrich the public databases that InVitae will rely on, and contribute to, as its business grows.

Price, of course, will be a huge factor in determining how widely the tests are adopted, and how well they will be embraced by insurers. InVitae's service will rise and fall at various points, as technology drives things down, and valuable new features drive things back up, Scott says. Competitors, both publicly declared and stealthy, will also play a role in determining just how high or low the prices will be.

Scott, during a short interview at the JP Morgan Healthcare Conference in San Francisco, seemed to relish all the uncertainty and variables heading his way in the new venture. "We're really just entering the world, in 2013, where these types of products are coming to market," he says.


Original Page: http://pocket.co/sGbA2
Shared from Pocket


Wednesday, May 9, 2012

MDx pure-plays: exception, not the rule

After writing about Gen-Probe's acquisition the other day I wondered how many stand-alone molecular diagnostics (MDx) companies were left. Here's the entire list of independent MDx companies that have reached critical mass (>$1B valuation):

1. Myriad Genetics

(You could make a strong case for Qiagen or Cepheid as well, but the majority of their businesses are still reagent supply, and hardware, respectively. Genomic Health (GHDX) just misses as their valuation is ~$125M short for now, but there is every reason to believe that GHDX will graduate to "critical mass" with time.)


There's a lot of MDx business addressed by subsidiaries of large companies (Roche Diagnostics, Abbott, or Clarient, for example), micro-cap MDx companies (Response Genetics or Diagnocure for example), or general clinical testing companies (Quest Diagnostics, LabCorp, etc.) so the lack of pure-plays isn't reflective of market interest. Instead, it reflects how in molecular diagnostics, good distribution and good capitalization are more important than good science and IP.

I think it is also reflective of the fact that success in the diagnostics field can not be driven by one or a small handful of diagnostic products or technologies, but instead by a broad catalog of assays, markets, and technologies. (The exception is Genomic Health, with a single product - OncoType DX - generating 100% of its' ~$200M in annual revenue.) This is really unfortunate for the dozens of single-product micro-cap diagnostics companies (Trovagen, Diagnocure, Response Genetics, etc.) Their two choices are either: hyper-specialize to dominate a market niche and hope to be acquired by a bigger player, or wait around to be steamrolled by a much bigger company with better distribution when the big company decides to enter the same space. 

Unfortunately, most small MDx companies overvalue their technology and their niche market, and overestimate how high the barriers to entry are in their market. These small MDx companies don't realize that they're often just re-selling time on their lab equipment, rather than building a defensible, sustainable business. Case in point: MolecularMD.

How can you tell if an MDx company is special or is just renting time on their equipment: look at the gross margins. Myriad Genetics has an 87% gross margin. Response Genetics: 48% gross margin.

It is also likely that the message the markets are making is that successful diagnostic companies need not be tech-centric, meaning that differences between genomic and protein technologies are an artificial, meaningless distinction. No clinicians will really care if a diagnosis is generated using PCR or protein arrays, and payers care only about efficacy and cost.

With the MDx opportunity widely dispersed among small and large diagnostics companies and clinical labs, there is a BIG opportunity for some well-capitalized venture to collect the niche assays dispersed among smallish MDx companies (buying at a price driven by a small multiple of net cash flow), and building a broad, specialized sales & distribution network with better operating margins collectively than apart. This is also the sort of space ideal for a VC fund that believes in MDx but wants to make a larger, lower-risk investment in the field.

Monday, February 6, 2012

Well done, Genomic Health!

When writing about the proposed acquisition of Illumina by Roche I mentioned that I didn't think a $6B acquisition of a hardware maker was the best strategy for Roche to bring their molecular diagnostics business into the DNA sequencing era. (Instead I recommended large-scale, aggressive partnering to grow the molecular diagnostics business.)

In contrast, one company with what I think is EXACTLY the right strategy to advance their molecular diagnostics business into the sequencing era is Genomic Health.

Genomic Health's existing product (Oncotype DX) is a 21-gene PCR test to predict breast cancer recurrence, and a similar product for colon cancer is late stage development. Both of these tests may someday "graduate" to a sequencing basis, if either NGS becomes more economical, or additional value is seen in collecting genomic data beyond the 21 genes of interest. 

But Genomic Health understands the need to augment or match product innovation with platform innovation.

For $20M (or about .03% of the Illumina acquisition price) Genomic Health will be launching a wholly-owned subsidiary devoted to developing sequencing-based tests. This is brilliant on so many levels:


-GHDX kept the founding/leadership team in place, while allowing them to pursue new, more exciting fields. The continuity of the team will be important here, while the new venture won't have to invest in some of the infrastructure already covered by GHDX (such as CLIA certification)

-$20M - while a good-sized investment in R&D - is a more smart-sized play when compared to other NGS-diagnostic players, like Foundation Medicine, which launched with an "A" round of $34M, without even a product strategy. (~15 months after founding, Foundation has just won CLIA certification. This is not an insignificant accomplishment, but still represents the company just now 'reaching the starting line.' )

-For GHDX, the $20M represents about 18 months of operating cash flow. It's a serious investment into (potentially) cannibalizing their own business. If you're a fan of Clayton Christensen and his "Innovator's Dilemma" line of thinking, you'd praise GHDX for being willing to take this initiative, where other former market leaders have treated their existing markets as sacred and protected.

-GHDX is banking on the idea that though their R&D investment will crimp earnings in the short term, equity value akin to that seen in Foundation medicine is likely to result. To illustrate this, imagine if Foundation's $34M seed round valued the company at $50M (post-money, without anything more than a business plan.) For $20M, GHDX has essentially generated $14M in net equity value ($50M enterprise value less $34M cash), and I'd argue that GHDX's venture is worth more than Foundation without spending a dime yet.)

(in fairness, some finance types would argue that with GHDX having a P/E ratio of 126x, reducing operating profit by $10M/yr costs something like $1.26B in foregone equity value, but 1) GHDX's market cap is only $850M, and 2) GHDX is down only 5% since their press release announcing the sequencing initiative.)

-many other companies in GHDX's position might realize the opportunity that NGS diagnostics represent, but instead decide to survey the field of start-ups and trade equity to acquire such products rather than invest in R&D to dilute earnings. GHDX's approach insures that NGS will be a core competency for product development, while still maintaining the option to spin out the subsidiary at any  time. (Continuing to riff on the GHDX echoing some brilliant business strategists like Christensen, I'd say that this represents GHDX's commitment to a Jim Collins 'built to last' culture."

Kudos to GHDX!


-finally, one curiosity: in the press release announcing the initiative, GHDX only once used the word "genomics." (Besides in their corporate name.) Many millions of dollars have been flushed over the last decade by start-ups pursuing genomic solutions. For this reason, I think GHDX has spun their news away from genomics.