3 Biotech Stocks to Avoid: Amarin, Dendreon, and Prosensa

Editor's Note: A clarification was made regarding the clinical trials of three competing prostate cancer drugs.

In the stock market, everyone loves a great turnaround story. In the biotech sector, where companies can rally or plunge by the double-digits on an FDA approval or rejection, bottom-fishing investors love to search for broken stocks with overlooked positive catalysts around the corner.

However, these three biotech stocks -- Amarin (NASDAQ: AMRN  ) , Dendreon (NASDAQ: DNDN  ) , Prosensa (NASDAQ: RNA  ) -- don't fit that category at all. Read on to understand why these dogs of the sector should never be mistaken as underdogs.

Amarin: Sit tight until 2017, dear investors...
Amarin's chances for a turnaround in 2014 went from minimal to non-existent after the FDA rejected the company's request to reconsider its October 2013 decision to rescind its ANCHOR clinical trial SPA (Special Protocol Assessment) on January 21.

That decision shattered Amarin's last hope at pursuing the critical ANCHOR indication for its only marketed drug, the fish oil treatment Vascepa. Vascepa was approved in 2012 to treat "severe" hypertriglyceridemia (triglyceride levels equal to or higher than 500 mg/DL) in patients not taking statins. The ANCHOR indication would have expanded Vascepa to patients with "elevated" hypertriglyceridemia (equal to or higher than 200 mg/DL but less than 500 mg/DL) who were also taking statins -- which would have helped it reach roughly 20% of the U.S. population.

More importantly, it would have helped it escape competition from GlaxoSmithKline's (NYSE: GSK  ) Lovaza, the leading fish oil treatment for severe hypertriglyceridemia. Lovaza, which was approved in the U.S. in 2004, generated $917 million in fiscal 2013 sales compared to $16.2 million in Vascepa sales in the three quarters since the drug's U.S. launch in January 2013.

AMRN Chart

Source: Ycharts.

Although Vascepa notably does not raise "bad" LDL cholesterol levels as Lovaza does, it hit the market far too late and couldn't match GSK's marketing muscle. To make matters worse, a generic version of Lovaza could arrive in early 2015 and erode sales of both drugs. Those factors make Wall Street's original peak sales estimates of $1 billion to $2 billion for Vascepa look absurd.

Amarin's financials also don't look like they're built to last. The company finished last quarter with $225.9 million in cash and equivalents and $239.8 million in debt. It notably issued additional ADR shares in July 2013 to raise $121.2 million, but it still reported a negative operating cash flow of $201.0 million over the past 12 months.

The only real catalyst for this stock won't arrive until 2017, when it announces the outcome of the phase 3 REDUCE-IT trial testing Vascepa for cardiovascular events. That's a long time to wait for an announcement that could ultimately amount to nothing.

Dendreon: The cautionary tale that gets worse by the year...
Meanwhile, Dendreon, the maker of the metastatic prostate cancer drug Provenge, has become a cautionary tale in putting too much faith in Wall Street's peak sales projections. Back in 2010, analysts forecast that Provenge could hit peak sales of $3 billion to $4 billion. Take a look at sales of Dendreon over the past year to see what went wrong:

 

Product revenue

YOY growth

1Q 2013

$68 million

(17.6%)

2Q 2013

$73 million

(8.4%)

3Q 2013

$68 million

(12.8%)

4Q 2013 (preliminary)

$75 million

(12.5%)

Source: Dendreon quarterly reports.

A total of $284 million in Provenge sales in fiscal 2013 is a far cry from Wall Street's blockbuster estimates, and also represents a disappointing 13% decline from fiscal 2012.

To make matters worse, two major competing treatments -- Johnson & Johnson's (NYSE: JNJ  ) Zytiga and Astellas/Medivation's (NASDAQ: MDVN  ) Xtandi -- were later approved in the U.S. and Europe. Both drugs quickly gained favor over Provenge, since both drugs were orally administered in contrast to Provenge's intravenous injections, and both drugs demonstrated higher efficacy rates during clinical trials. Compared to a placebo, Zytiga and Xtandi respectively demonstrated median extensions of life of 4.6 and 4.8 months, compared to 4.1 months for Provenge. However, this isn't a perfect apples to apples comparison, since Zytiga and Xtandi's data came from patients who already received chemotherapy, while Provenge was tested pre-chemo.

The one smidgen of good news that Dendreon received last year was the approval of Provenge in the EU in September. The company then inked a two-year deal with PharmaCell to market the drug in Europe. However, I seriously doubt that the two companies have enough marketing muscle to compete against Zytiga and Xtandi.

DNDN Chart

Source: Ycharts.

With only $166.7 million in cash and equivalents and $597.6 million in debt, Dendreon is in a precarious situation. Its only source of revenue is drying up fast, and it has no other late-stage pipeline candidates.

Prosensa: GSK doesn't believe in it -- so why should you?
Throughout 2013, Prosensa and its former partner GlaxoSmithKline competed against Sarepta Therapeutics (NASDAQ: SRPT  ) to launch the first dedicated treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).

DMD is a rare and fatal genetic disease which affects one in every 3,500 boys born worldwide. The disease causes progressive muscle weakness, usually confining patients to a wheelchair by age 12 and causing death by age 16.

Prosensa's drisapersen and Sarepta's eteplirsen both use RNA exon-skipping technology to boost the production of dystrophin, a protein necessary for muscle growth which DMD patients lack. The clinical trials for both are mainly measured in two main ways -- the production of dystrophin and a six-minute walk test, which gauges how far a patient can walk within six minutes.

Prosensa's problem is that drisapersen has consistently trailed eteplirsen in efficacy. A phase 2 study conducted by GSK showed that drisapersen patients could walk an average of 117 feet more than patients given a placebo. Unfortunately, that didn't measure up to the improvement of 152 feet Sarepta reported in its eteplirsen patients. However, investors should note that GSK's group consisted of 53 boys compared to only 12 in Sarepta's group.

GSK and Prosensa then moved on to a phase 3 study with 186 boys, but that trial failed to meet its primary endpoints or even demonstrate an improvement over the placebo last September. As a result, the stock plunged from $24.00 to $7.14 in a single day. Sarepta didn't fare much better -- its stock lost more than half its value on November 12, after the FDA told the company that it should not seek accelerated approval for eteplirsen on its positive phase 2 results alone.

RNA Chart

Source: Ycharts.

GSK eventually handed drisapersen back to Prosensa in January 2014, ending the four year collaboration between the companies. That left Prosensa dead in the water, with only $112.3 million in cash at the end of last quarter, and a negative operating cash flow of $28.4 million.

Last month, Prosensa reported some additional data at the JPMorgan Healthcare Conference which suggested that earlier treatment of DMD with drisapersen could slow the progression of the disease. However, investors should take that development with a grain of salt, considering that Sarepta also released 120-week results at the conference which showed improvements in the six-minute walk test among its original 12 patients.

The Foolish takeaway
In conclusion, biotech investors shouldn't confuse an underdog with a dog. These three busted biotech stocks -- Amarin, Dendreon, and Prosensa -- don't have any real positive catalysts on the horizon and won't recover anytime soon. Yet shrewd investors should notice that their failures highlight better, more conservative picks in each category -- GSK for fish oil treatments, J&J or Medivation for metastatic pancreatic cancer drugs, and Sarepta for potential DMD treatments.

Tired of volatile biotech stocks?
As every savvy investor knows, Warren Buffett didn't make billions by betting on half-baked stocks. He isolated his best few ideas, bet big, and rode them to riches, hardly ever selling. You deserve the same. That's why our CEO, legendary investor Tom Gardner, has permitted us to reveal The Motley Fool's 3 Stocks to Own Forever. These picks are free today! Just click here now to uncover the three companies we love. 

 


Read/Post Comments (14) | Recommend This Article (0)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 4:56 PM, MTherami wrote:

    Yet another Motley Fool writer publishing lies about Dendreon. Let's do some fact checking, shall we:

    In the article above, Leo Sun claims that, Zytiga and Xtandi "demonstrated higher efficacy rates during clinical trials" over Dendreon's Provenge. Sun goes on to say, "Compared to a placebo, Zytiga and Xtandi respectively demonstrated median extensions of life of 4.6 and 4.8 months, compared to 4.1 months for Provenge". THESE ARE FALSE STATEMENTS.

    Here is the TRUTH. The median overall survival (OS) rates as demonstrated in Phase III clinical trials are follows:

    Dendreon's Provenge: 4.1 months

    Astellas' / Medivations' Xtandi: 2.2 months

    Johnson & Johnson's Zytiga: NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT

    The FACT is that Provenge provides nearly double the median overall survival (OS) rate of Xtandi. The Zytiga Phase III study was halted before a statistically significant OS could be reached.

    Leo Sun goes on to say that Dendreon's "only source of revenue is drying up fast". However, he includes data in the article that demonstrates that Q4 sales exceeded Q3 results by double-digit rates. Is that an example of revenue "drying up"? The FACT is that in 2013, Dendreon launched a direct-to-consumer (DTC) marketing campaign that appears to be getting the message out to patients and physicians that Dendreon is the only immunotherapy for prostate cancer approved by the FDA.

    Finally, Leo Sun ignores all potential catalysts that exist for Dendreon:

    1) Reuters and Bloomberg reported back in October that the company had brought on JP Morgan to help facilitate the sale of the company.

    2) Dendreon is seeking a partner to help launch Provenge in the EU

    3) Clinical trials are currently underway in which Provenge is being tested as a combination therapy with Zytiga and Xtandi. If the results indicate that Provenge followed by Zytiga or Provenge followed by Xtandi extend life further than either treatment alone, Provenge could become part of a sequenced therapy that becomes the new standard in treatment for mCRPC.

    4) If the company is not sold, Dendreon could enter into a partnership with a big pharma / biotech firm.

    5) Dendreon could potentially refinance their debt under more favorable terms.

    Indeed, Dendreon has a past that was quite disastrous. However, this article by Leo Sun is completely one-sided and contains blatant inaccuracies. By failing to write a balanced piece, Sun has painted an image of DNDN that ignores that current value of the companies product, pipeline, IP and patents. In doing so, he completely misses the upside potential that could be realized should one or more of the catalysts listed above come to pass.

  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Alteonwins wrote:

    Why do you guys keep pubishing and republishing all of these false information about Provenge and Dendreon?

  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 6:15 PM, info4all wrote:

    I too am questioning his data, can you please let me/us know where you are getting your information. Maybe post a link. Thanks

  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 6:31 PM, Bidmark wrote:

    Regarding Amarin...you know what....it's not even worth trying to respond because your piece is so riddled with half truths, lies, and buffoonery that it's not worth the trouble. Try doing just a little research before you trot out the next bit of blather.

  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 8:56 PM, TMFSunLion wrote:
  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 8:57 PM, TMFSunLion wrote:

    @Bidmark -- It seems like you're having trouble giving me one example of a "half truth or lie".

  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 9:49 PM, spwangsu wrote:

    Again, fools has a 'NICE' article. I still remember the article written by fools about Amarin and Ariad when both were sitting in 2s. Fools strongly suggested Amarin over Ariad at the time. Now, Aria is around 9 and Amarin is at 1.75.

  • Report this Comment On February 17, 2014, at 10:59 PM, TMFSunLion wrote:

    Interesting take, but we don't all share the same opinions. We all have different opinions. I've stated early on how much I dislike Amarin -- go read this article I wrote last September:

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/09/16/will-this-f...

  • Report this Comment On February 18, 2014, at 11:13 AM, Alteonwins wrote:

    Dear writer, you are confusing post chemo data with prechemo data. Zytiga did not reach statistical significance and Xtandi had only a 2 month survival benefit. Please get your fact straight. Provenge does not have any data to show survival post chemo so you are comparing apples and oranges. There are people on Provenge that will never need chemo because the drug works whereas every patient on Xtandi and Zytiga if they live long enough will eventually need chemo and eventually die with minimal survival benefit as demonstrated by clinical data. The only thing those two drugs do is delay chemo.

  • Report this Comment On February 18, 2014, at 12:35 PM, ajaysmith wrote:

    What does a 20 yr old BA in English know anything about investing in biotech?

  • Report this Comment On February 18, 2014, at 1:18 PM, TMFSunLion wrote:

    Wow, 20 years old? I'm flattered, thanks!

  • Report this Comment On February 18, 2014, at 1:58 PM, ajaysmith wrote:

    Whatever.. .but you are no great investor and you definitely know nothing about biotech.

  • Report this Comment On February 18, 2014, at 6:06 PM, Bidmark wrote:

    @sunlyin'

    I'm too busy and your article is too riddled with these gems, but how about "Amarin's chances for a turnaround in 2014 went from minimal to non-existent..." "Non-existent"? How can you arrive at that? What facts that you left out allows you to make such a bold statement? Seriously, dude. If you want to be respected as a journalist (I'm assuming you want that, right?), eliminate the hyperbole and the outrageous unsupported statements, do your research and write about it.

  • Report this Comment On February 18, 2014, at 6:19 PM, ajaysmith wrote:

    He is a failed BA in English who is a "contract" writer for MF. He gets paid for every "article" he writes... There were a couple of million naked shorts (undelivered) at the end of Jan, so he probably gets paid handsomely from those guys. Who knows?

Add your comment.

DocumentId: 2841769, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 4/16/2014 12:20:39 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

TREND TRACKER: Get Rich When the Web Goes Dark

It's time to say "goodbye" to your Internet! One bleeding-edge technology is about to put the World Wide Web to bed. And if you act right away, it could make you wildly rich. Experts are calling it the single largest business opportunity in the history of capitalism… The Economist is calling it "transformative"... but you'll probably just call it "how I made my millions." Big money is already on the move. Don't be too late to the party – find out the 1 stock to own when the Web goes dark.


Advertisement