|
|
During the past 20 years, the author has watch China move from being a developing country into an industrial superpower
Money Moves, 5/24: Chocomize Co-Founder Fabian Kaempfer talks with Bloomberg’s Deirdre Bolton about the business of customizing chocolate
The president's campaign has a new rule—no cell phones allowed
In honor of remote control inventor Eugene Polley, we recognize other influential but neglected inventors who have felt the sting of stolen glory
Forget Adderall. Traders now pop chia seeds to stay focused and energized
The Italian automaker and others are adding hybrid technology to elite cars
The storied bridge that links San Francisco and Marin County changed the face of California
Schools cultivate ties with startups before they're big successes
Dave McClure's traveling venture capital show scours the world for promising startups
Get Four
|  | JANUARY 21, 2004
 FOCUS STOCK By Frank DiLorenzo, CFA Is ImClone Out of the Woods? [Page 2 of 2] PARTNER PAYMENTS. ImClone and Bristol-Myers entered into a commercialization agreement for Erbitux in September, 2001. In March, 2002, slight changes were made to the deal, largely regarding lower potential milestone payments to ImClone and a lower royalty payment from Merck KGaA. However, terms for payment on U.S. sales were largely unchanged, and ImClone is entitled to a $250 million cash payment from Bristol-Myers upon initial FDA approval. Subsequent FDA approval in an additional indication would yield ImClone one more $250 million payout. ImClone is entitled to a distribution fee approximating 39% of U.S. and Canadian Erbitux sales from partner Bristol-Myers. ImClone will supply Bristol-Myers with Erbitux at a 10% markup above cost of goods sold. Bristol-Myers is largely responsible for development, sales, and promotion of the product. However, ImClone also plans to field its own small, specialized sales force. Merck KGaA is responsible for EU sales of Erbitux, with ImClone entitled to a royalty. We estimate this payment at 7.5%. While ImClone will initially supply Merck KGaA with Erbitux, Merck may eventually build its own manufacturing facility. We believe Merck KGaA will eventually produce its own supply once construction is completed. OTHER TARGETS. We think ImClone has enough current manufacturing capacity (30,000 liters) at its facilities, as well as inventory buildup of Erbitux, to cover demand through 2005. We think additional production capacity could be available by 2006. We would expect ImClone to attempt to gain additional capacity from a third-party manufacturer by 2005 if the initial Erbitux launches in the U.S. and EU proceed stronger than expected into next year. We believe it would be a mistake not to procure a manufacturing promise from a second source if sales are building very strongly. Additionally, we believe Merck KGaA manufacturing its own supply by 2006 or 2007 would help to prevent potential capacity shortfalls. ImClone is also working on a number of other oncology targets that we view as promising. It has been prudent, in our opinion, not to accelerate these programs as it concentrates on Erbitux approval and conserving cash until it potentially receives a $250 million milestone payment from Bristol-Myers. In addition to collaborating on Erbitux, ImClone and Merck KGaA are working on a cancer vaccine called BEC2. It's being tested in a long-term, Phase III clinical trial in patients with limited disease small-cell lung carcinoma. We think BEC2 could potentially be approved by 2006, at the earliest, assuming a positive patient-survival outcome. CANCER OPPORTUNITIES. ImClone is also conducting research into antibodies that block vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor. Its most advanced agent in this area is designed to block VEGF receptor 2 (known as KDR). We believe a Phase I trial with a fully human MAb is possible by yearend. In 2005, we think ImClone could move into the clinic with a fully human MAb against VEGF receptor 1 (known as Flt-1). ImClone is also conducting research into type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF-1R). It has been hypothesized that blocking the binding of insulin-like growth factor may lead to apoptosis (cell death). A compound that disrupts this binding process may have utility in treating certain solid-tumor cancers. We think it's possible that ImClone can potentially move a MAb against this receptor into Phase I trials in 2005. According to the National Cancer Institute, an estimated 147,700 new colorectal cancer cases were reported in the U.S. in 2003, with about 57,100 deaths. Potential opportunities in other cancers, contingent upon clinical trial results, could lead to off-label use and expanded approvals. We're assuming a cost of $15,000 to $20,000 for a full course of Erbitux therapy. As a result, we think there could be a substantial commercial opportunity if Erbitux is highly adopted in the oncology community. PROFITS IN '05. We're projecting $138 million in U.S. Erbitux sales for 2004 and $279 million in 2005. Our peak annual sales estimate in the U.S. reaches $1.5 billion in 2012. We forecast $37 million in EU sales for 2004 and $102 million in 2005, with peak annual EU sales of $600 million by 2012. EU sales are much less significant to ImClone due to the terms of its collaborative arrangements. While we estimate losses per share of $1.58 in 2003 and 32 cents in 2004, respectively, we expect ImClone to turn profitable in 2005 with earnings per share of 45 cents, followed by $1.30 in 2006. Based on our net present value analysis of Erbitux and the rest of ImClone's pipeline, our 12-month target price is $50. We believe that over 85% of ImClone's value is embedded in Erbitux' potential success. On an S&P Core Earnings basis, we see a per-share loss of $2.08 in 2003 and a per-share loss of 75 cents in 2004. The difference between our S&P Core EPS and operating-earnings estimates largely reflects stock-option expense. While we expect rapid EPS growth into the second half of the decade, option issuance could significantly increase the number of shares outstanding. We have reflected this in our valuation. Without heavy option issuance, we think ImClone would be more valuable than our current analysis suggests. RIVALS OR PARTNERS? Two significant risks exist, in our view. One is the possibility that Erbitux isn't approved. If this occurs, ImClone shares would likely decline. The second noticeable risk are dwindling cash reserves. ImClone clearly needs the approval to occur by February so it can receive the $250 million infusion from Bristol-Myers. Additionally, approval and a strong launch could lead to a possible financing deal, in our view. In addition to ABX-EGF, some other high-profile anticancer medications may compete directly against Erbitux or even possibly be used in combination with it. Merck KGaA is developing EMD 72000, a humanized MAb that binds to EGFR. Although it doesn't use the same mechanism of action as Erbitux, Genentech's Avastin will also likely be a major player in the treatment of colorectal cancer, and possibly other solid-tumor cancers. All of the products mentioned above are injectable biologics. However, a number of small molecules approved or under development are designed to disrupt the intracellular signaling of cancer cells. AstraZeneca's (AZN; 3 STARS; $47) Iressa is approved for non-small-cell lung cancer, and OSI Pharmaceuticals (OSIP; not ranked; $32) is developing Tarceva for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer.
 Analyst DiLorenzo follows biotechnology stocks for Standard & Poor's Equity Research All of the views expressed in this research report accurately reflect the research analyst's personal views regarding any and all of the subject securities or issuers. No part of analyst compensation was, is or will be, directly or indirectly related to the specific recommendations or views expressed in this research report. Standard & Poor's Regulatory Disclosure Any advice, analysis, or recommendations contained in articles labeled "Insight from Standard & Poor's" reflect the views of Standard & Poor's, which operates separately from and independently of BusinessWeek Online. It is possible that BWOL may from time to time publish information that is not consistent with advice, analysis, or recommendations that are published by Standard & Poor's. Standard & Poor's and BusinessWeek Online are each units of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.  Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed. Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video. To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here. Learn more, go to the BusinessWeekOnline home page  | | |
 Copyright 2004, Bloomberg L.P.Terms of Use | Privacy Notice |
Printer-Friendly Version
