Can Steve Jobs's Case Help Propel Biopharma?

Recently three high-profile cases of pancreatic cancer have elevated a tumor type that many argue gets short shrift.

Actor Patrick Swayze, professor-turned-motivational speaker Randy Pausch (he recently passed away) and now Apple's (AAPL) Steve Jobs have--voluntarily or involuntarily--saw or have seen their private battles against pancreatic cancer go public.

Even though it's one of the leading causes of cancer death in the U.S., pancreatic normally doesn't get much attention.

Julie Fleshman, the President and CEO of the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network tells "Pharma's Market" in an email:

It is unfortunate that it takes high profile cases to raise awareness, but the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network is hopeful that the heightened visibility will lead to increased federal and private funding for pancreatic cancer research and ultimately a cure for this devastating disease.

I am absolutely making no judgments about the prognosis for Mr. Swayze or Mr. Jobs, but the fact is that the disease, in general, is almost always fatal and the treatment options are few. There's Gemzar from Eli Lilly (LLY) and Tarceva from OSI Pharmaceuticals (OSIP) and Genentech (DNA). However, several biopharma companies are in the final stages of testing other drugs to potentially treat it.

In big pharma, Pfizer (PFE), Lilly, and Sanofi-Aventis (SNY) all have drugs for pancreatic cancer in what's called phase three clinical trials. That's typically the last step before seeking FDA approval if the results are good enough. LLY's candidate is Erbitux which it recently stuffed into its portfolio and pipeline with the acquisition of ImClone Systems. Mid-, small- and micro-cap biotechs, including Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN), Supergen (SUPG), Genvec (GNVC), and Threshold Pharmaceuticals (THLD) are also working on drugs in late-stage development.

Patter Birsic and Jane Holt, the Co-Founders and Co-Presidents of the National Pancreas Foundation emailed this statement that also takes a bit of a stand regarding the case of Steve Jobs:

The reality is that celebrities do bring attention to the disease. When they chose to speak publicly about their health, Dr. Pausch and Mr. Swayze performed a tremendous public service. By choosing not (Note: the underline is their emphasis) to speak publicly about his health, Mr. Jobs has also done a tremendous public service. His choice reminds us that a person's health is a private matter. We respect that choice, and the right of all patients to choose how they will deal with a very serious, and private, matter.

Comments

[Beta Delta:]

mike, you should do some due diligence on genvec and their tnferade drug. this drug has the potential to be the next major breakthrough in the treatment of solid tumor carcinoma's, especially pancreatic, for which its in mid to late phase 3 trial. data from its interim look after 92 deaths showed a marked improvement in survival between 12 and 18 months

beta

Jan 16 09:23 AM

[queenofzen:]

Steve Jobs' original malignancy was not an adenocarcinoma which is what the vast majority of "pancreatic cancers" are, but in fact, a neuroendocrine tumor often called an "insulinoma." the management and prognosis for this type of tumor is vastly different from the more common adenocarcinoma.
Not correctly identifying the type of tumor Steve had makes one question the validity of the other information in your article.

Jan 16 11:53 AM

[raytayzmd:]

...I agree and would point out that if Jobs hadn't been such a total dumbass and wasted 9 months trying to treat it with a "special diet" -- which he presumably he got from his "guru" -- then his prognosis with standard medical therapy could have been quite good...how could such a screwball become CEO of a major company?


On Jan 16 11:53 AM queenofzen wrote:

> Steve Jobs' original malignancy was not an adenocarcinoma which is
> what the vast majority of "pancreatic cancers" are, but in fact,
> a neuroendocrine tumor often called an "insulinoma."... the management
> and prognosis for this type of tumor is vastly different from the
> more common adenocarcinoma.
> Not correctly identifying the type of tumor Steve had makes one question
> the validity of the other information in your article.
>

Jan 22 10:12 AM