DOCSLIB.ORG

Drug Discovery and Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Evotec Partnered Drug Discovery and Development Evotec SE, Company Presentation, July 2019 Forward-looking statement Information set forth in this presentation contains forward-looking statements, which involve a number of risks and uncertainties. We caution investors that forward-looking statements contained herein are based upon management’s expectations and assumptions as of the date of this presentation. Such forward-looking statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control, and which could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated in these forward-looking statements. We expressly disclaim any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any such statements to reflect any change in our expectations or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based. PAGE 1 Agenda Overview Partnered drug discovery & development Financials & Outlook PAGE 2 Leading external drug discovery & development Company snapshot 100+ € 375 m+ € 95 m+ Co-owned pipeline programmes with significant Revenues1) Adjusted Group EBITDA1) milestone & royalty potential 25+ 2,700+ 200+ Years track record Top-class employees2) Long-term partnerships 1) In 2018 PAGE 3 Medicine of the future will see radical change Technologies & mega trends Next gen sequencing More precise & early diagnostics iPSC & CRISPR gene editing Patient-centric medicine RNAi technologies, CAR-T Digital health Checkpoint inhibitors Predictive & preventive medicine & Partners Artificial intelligence, big data Value-based care 3D printing, blockchain, wearables, sensors Real-world data,… PAGE 4 Productivity challenge will increase Development costs vs. average peak sales Development Cost, $ m Sales, $ m 1,992 1,188 +68% 816 465 -43% 2010 2017 2010 2017 Cost per asset increased ~2/3rd since 2010 Average peak sales almost halved since 2010 Source: Deloitte’s Centre for Health Solutions: A new future for R&D? Measuring the return from pharmaceutical innovation 2017 PAGE 5 From fixed to variable costs R&D outsourcing in € bn ~30-36 ~85-90 ~10 100% 90% 80% 55 5 (~60%) (~50%) 70% ~7 (~70%) 60% ~25 Capital 50% (~90%) ∑ Elasticity € ~150 bn 40% 30% 35 5 (~50%) (~50%) 20% ~3 10% (~30%) ~3 (10%) 0% 0% 10% 20%30% 40%50% 60% 70% 80%90% 100% Discovery Pre-clinical/IND Manufacturing & Clinical development Others Not outsourced Outsourced Source: Visiongain – Drug Discovery Outsourcing Market Forecast 2015-2025 and Evotec’s estimates PAGE 6 Building a co-owned portfolio in partnerships Unique strategy and business approach – Action Plan 2022 Own R&D Co-Owned Pipeline Action Plan 2022 Fee for Service PAGE 7 R&D solutions up to IND and CMC manufacturing Our core competencies Pre- Hit Lead Target ID/ clinical identi- optimi- Phase I Phase II Phase III Approval Market validation Tox fication sation testing PAGE 8 Multimodality R&D becomes reality Small molecules, biologics & other modalities in R&D Global pharmaceutical market1), 2) US$ bn CAGR 2017-22e +7% 918 856 >50% 794 743 703 670 8% Cell/Gene therapy Biologics 5% Small molecules – EVT Core Expertise 2017 2018e 2019e 2020e 2021e 2022e 1) Small molecules forecast from May 2017 and Biologics forecast from Dec 2017 PAGE 9 2) Excluding sales not classified by EvaluatePharma Source: EvaluatePharma > 2,700 x unique expertise Global centres of excellence Abingdon, Alderley Park ~680 employees 1st J.POD Hamburg, Göttingen, Munich ~610 employees Verona, Basel Branford, Princeton, Seattle, Toulouse, Lyon ~660 employees Watertown ~140 + approx. 95 ~550 employees employees and growing PAGE 10 Agenda Overview Partnered drug discovery & development Financials & Outlook PAGE 11 ONE fully integrated platform EVT Execute & EVT Innovate IP with customers IP with Evotec IP = Intellectual Property PAGE 12 Improving quality and accelerating R&D EVT Execute – Selected performance indicators 1,000,000+ >50 >10 Compounds in highly IND – Pre-clinical & selective library clinical candidates Technology acquisitions1) delivered (INDiGO)1) 92% >1.8 >25% Repeat business2) Years average Faster delivery of data contract time at improved quality 1) Since 2012 PAGE 13 2) In 2018 With “Just.Bio” – Even more integrated offering Comprehensive service panel for external innovation PAGE 14 Building better molecules with better technologies J.DESIGN Technology Platform Molecular J.MD™ – Optimising molecules Design Using machine learning to design and J.MD™ select better biologics through molecular understanding and prediction with Abacus™, an ML software analysis tool JP3® – Optimising process Leverages high throughput technologies Process & Manufacturing to rapidly deliver robust manufacturing Product Design Design processes JP3® J.POD® J.POD® – Manufacturing1) Unique solutions for design of flexible, deployable technologies and facilities needed to improve speed and cost- effectiveness of manufacturing up to commercial supply Quality Speed Capacity Cost 1) J.POD are currently under construction for fastest possible initiation to build in USA and potentially also EU – expected 2021 PAGE 15 Strong and well-balanced global customer mix EVT Execute – Who are our partners? in % Foundations RoW 6 3 Mid-sized Pharma 17 USA 36 46 Biotech Revenue Customer by Region type Q1 20191) Q1 20191) 61 Europe 31 Top 20 Pharma 1) Third-party revenues only PAGE 16 Strong portfolio of highest quality partners EVT Execute alliances – Examples Partnership Partnership Partnership Partnership Partnership Partnership Partnership focused on focused covering broad focused on focused on focused focused on Huntington on various range of DMPK services infectious on various dermatology Disease indications services diseases indications Initiated 2006 Initiated 2011 Initiated 2015 Initiated 2016 Initiated 2016 Initiated 2016 Initiated 2018 Partnership Partnership Partnership for Partnership Partnership Partnership Partnership focused on focused on INDiGO, DD, focused on focused on CNS focused on focused on diabetes & reproductive and CMC oncology oncology oncology obesity medicine & women’s health Initiated 2018 Initiated 2018 Initiated 2015 Initiated 2016 Initiated 2018 Initiated 2017 Initiated 2015 PAGE 17 Building a co-owned pipeline EVT Innovate – Selected performance indicators 7 >€ 1,000 bn >100 Disease areas of Unmet markets Co-owned pipe- core expertise1) addressed line programmes 10 >10 100% Clinical Co- First-in-Class and best-in- owned assets Unpartnered large R&D class approaches “Going for initiatives Cure not for Symptoms” 1) CNS, Pain, Oncology, Respiratory, Diabetes/Metabolic diseases, Women’s health, Infectious disease PAGE 18 Creating massive upside with limited cost & risk Example for co-owned deal structures Performance-based components (Illustrative) Ø 8% Ø € 200 m Milestones (MS) per project € 5-65 m Upfront MS 1MS 2MS 3 MS 4 Clinical MS 5 MS 6 MS 7 Total Royalties R&D cost and/or Start research payments PAGE 19 > 100 projects in fully invested pipeline Partnership portfolio Molecule Therapeutic Area/Indication Partner Discovery Pre-clinical Phase I Phase II EVT201 CNS – Insomnia BAY-1817080 Chronic cough ND1) Chronic cough Ph. II start SGM-10192) Inflammation (NASH) CT7001 Oncology Ph. II start CT7001 Oncology Ph. II start EVT401 Immunology & Inflammation Various Women’s health – Endometriosis Clinical Various Women’s health – Endometriosis Various Women’s health – Endometriosis Various Respiratory ND1) Oncology ND1) Immunology & Inflammation ND1) Pain Various Women’s health – Endometriosis EVT801 Oncology TargetImmuniT Oncology – Immunotherapy ND1) Oncology (+ several discovery programmes) ND1) Fibrosis NEW collaboration Pre-clinical Various Anti-infectives >5 programmes Various CNS, Metabolic, Pain & Inflammation >10 further programmes Various ND1) Nephrology Various ND1) Immunology & Inflammation Various ND1) Nephrology Various ND1) Metabolic – Diabetes Various Oncology Various Immunology & Inflammation – Tissue fibrosis Various Neurodegeneration ND1) Anti-bacterial Various All indications ND1) Dermatological diseases ND1) Facioscapulohumeral Dystrophy INDY inhibitor Metabolic Various Fibrotic disease Fibrocor Therap. / Galapagos Discovery TargetPicV Antiviral Various Anti-infectives >5 programmes Various Internal: Oncology, CNS, Metabolic, Pain & Inflammation >40 further programmes ND1) Oncology NEW collaboration ND1) Novel antibiotics NEW collaboration ND1) Novel antibiotics NEW collaboration ND1) Oncology – Colorectal cancer NEW collaboration 1) Not disclosed PAGE 20 2) Under review – Clinical Phase II trial currently on hold Note: Several projects have fallen back to Evotec, where Evotec does not intend to run further clinical trials unpartnered, e.g. EVT302, EVT101, … Co-owned projects with great partners EVT Innovate alliances – Examples Oncology I Chronic kidney Oncology Fibrosis Neurodegeneration Picornavirus Multi-target alliance disease (“CKD”) Small molecule- Novel mechanisms iPSC-based drug Respiratory Diabetic immunotherapies to in multi-organ fibrosis discovery indications2) complications complement check- point inhibitors1) Initiated 2018 Initiated 2016 Initiated 2015 Initiated 2015 Initiated 2016 Initiated 2017 Oncology II Endometriosis/Pain Diabetes Oncology & Infectious diseases Oncology & Respiratory Respiratory Targeted protein iPSC Beta Cell – Open innovation Joint Venture on degradation Non-hormonal Diabetes alliance Multi-target alliance alliance multiple targets treatments Initiated 2018
Recommended publications
  • MDAX—2019 Supervisory Board Study Key Insights from This Year’S Analysis by Russell Reynolds Associates

    MDAX—2019 Supervisory Board Study Key Insights from This Year’S Analysis by Russell Reynolds Associates

    MDAX—2019 Supervisory Board Study Key insights from this year’s analysis by Russell Reynolds Associates Summary Over the past year, Germany's MDAX companies have experienced significant change. The number of companies in the index increased by 10, bringing the overall total to 60. Moreover, 11 "old economy" firms, including Jungheinrich, Krones, Leoni, Salzgitter and Schaeffler, were ousted by pharma, med and biotech risers, such as Evotec, Morphosys, Qiagen, Sartorius and Siemens Healthineers, as well as "new economy" powerhouses like Dialog, Nemetschek, Software AG, Telefonica D, and United Internet. This was also an exceptional election year, with 106 shareholder representative positions expiring. All positions were filled. A total of 67 board members were re-elected, while 36 were replaced. The three remaining roles were absorbed by changes to board sizes. Female shareholder representation surpasses 30 percent For the first time, the share of female shareholder representatives surpassed the required quota, reaching 30.6 percent. Including employee representatives, women now make up 32 percent of supervisory board members. A total of three boards are now chaired by women. However, there is still a major gender discrepancy concerning positions of power when comparing chairpersonships and especially executive board positions. Only four companies can boast more than 30 percent of female executives, while 40 MDAX companies do not have a single woman in a leadership role. Accelerated increase in digital directors The number of digital directors on MDAX supervisory boards showed a significant 30 percent year- on-year increase. However, digital expertise is still unevenly spread in the MDAX. Seven companies have three or more digital directors, while 57 percent of boards completely lack digital expertise.
  • Computational Approaches for Drug Design and Discovery: an Overview

    Computational Approaches for Drug Design and Discovery: an Overview

    Review Article Computational Approaches for Drug Design and Discovery: An Overview Baldi A College of Pharmacy, Dr. Shri R.M.S. Institute of Science & Technology, Bhanpura, Dist. Mandsaur (M.P.), India ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: The process of drug discovery is very complex and requires an interdisciplinary effort to design Received 12 July 2009 effective and commercially feasible drugs. The objective of drug design is to find a chemical Accepted 21 July 2009 compound that can fit to a specific cavity on a protein target both geometrically and chemically. Available online 04 February 2010 After passing the animal tests and human clinical trials, this compound becomes a drug available Keywords: to patients. The conventional drug design methods include random screening of chemicals Computer-aided drug design found in nature or synthesized in laboratories. The problems with this method are long design Combinatorial chemistry cycle and high cost. Modern approach including structure-based drug design with the help Drug of informatic technologies and computational methods has speeded up the drug discovery Structure-based drug deign process in an efficient manner. Remarkable progress has been made during the past five years in almost all the areas concerned with drug design and discovery. An improved generation of softwares with easy operation and superior computational tools to generate chemically stable and worthy compounds with refinement capability has been developed. These tools can tap into cheminformation to shorten the cycle of drug discovery, and thus make drug discovery more cost-effective. A complete overview of drug discovery process with comparison of conventional approaches of drug discovery is discussed here.
  • Opportunities and Challenges in Phenotypic Drug Discovery: an Industry Perspective

    Opportunities and Challenges in Phenotypic Drug Discovery: an Industry Perspective

    PERSPECTIVES Nevertheless, there are still challenges in OPINION prospectively understanding the key success factors for modern PDD and how maximal Opportunities and challenges in value can be obtained. Articles published after the analysis by Swinney and Anthony have re-examined the contribution of PDD phenotypic drug discovery: an to new drug discovery6,7 and have refined the conditions for its successful application8. industry perspective Importantly, it is apparent on closer examination that the classification of drugs John G. Moffat, Fabien Vincent, Jonathan A. Lee, Jörg Eder and as ‘phenotypically discovered’ is somewhat Marco Prunotto inconsistent6,7 and that, in fact, the majority of successful drug discovery programmes Abstract | Phenotypic drug discovery (PDD) approaches do not rely on knowledge combine target knowledge and functional of the identity of a specific drug target or a hypothesis about its role in disease, in cellular assays to identify drug candidates contrast to the target-based strategies that have been widely used in the with the most advantageous molecular pharmaceutical industry in the past three decades. However, in recent years, there mechanism of action (MoA). Although there is clear evidence that phenotypic has been a resurgence in interest in PDD approaches based on their potential to screening can be an attractive proposition address the incompletely understood complexity of diseases and their promise for efficiently identifying functionally of delivering first-in-class drugs, as well as major advances in the tools for active hits that lead to first-in-class drugs, cell-based phenotypic screening. Nevertheless, PDD approaches also have the gap between a screening hit and an considerable challenges, such as hit validation and target deconvolution.
  • Medicinal Chemistry for Drug Discovery | Charles River

    Medicinal Chemistry for Drug Discovery | Charles River

    Summary Medicinal chemistry is an integral part of bringing a drug through development. Our medicinal chemistry approach enables clients to benefit from efficient navigation of the early drug discovery process through to delivery of preclinical candidates. DISCOVERY Click to learn more Medicinal Chemistry for Drug Discovery Medicinal Chemistry A Proven Track Record in Drug Discovery Services: Our medicinal chemistry team has experience in progressing small molecule drug discovery programs across a broad range • Target identification of therapeutic areas and gene families. Our scientists are skilled in the design and synthesis of novel pharmacologically active - Capture Compound® mass compounds and understand the challenges facing modern drug discovery. Together, they are cited as inventors on over spectrometry (CCMS) 350 patents and have identified 80 preclinical candidates for client organizations across a variety of therapeutic areas. As • Hit-finding strategies project leaders, our chemists are fundamental in driving the program strategy and have consistently empowered our clients’ - Optimizing high-throughput success. A high proportion of candidates regularly progress to the clinic, and our first co-invented drug, Belinostat, received screening (HTS) hits marketing approval in 2015. As an organization, Charles River has worked on 85% of the therapies approved in 2018. • Hit-to-lead We have a deep understanding of the factors that drive medicinal chemistry design: structure-activity relationship (SAR), • Lead optimization biology, physical chemistry, drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics (DMPK), pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) • Patent strategy modelling, and in vivo efficacy. Charles River scientists are skilled in structure-based and ligand-based design approaches • Preparation for IND filing utilizing our in-house computer-aided drug design (CADD) expertise.
  • Overcoming the Immunosuppressive Tumor Microenvironment in Multiple Myeloma

    Overcoming the Immunosuppressive Tumor Microenvironment in Multiple Myeloma

    cancers Review Overcoming the Immunosuppressive Tumor Microenvironment in Multiple Myeloma Fatih M. Uckun 1,2,3 1 Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center and Childrens Center for Cancer and Blood Diseases, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine (USC KSOM), Los Angeles, CA 90027, USA; [email protected] 2 Department of Developmental Therapeutics, Immunology, and Integrative Medicine, Drug Discovery Institute, Ares Pharmaceuticals, St. Paul, MN 55110, USA 3 Reven Pharmaceuticals, Translational Oncology Program, Golden, CO 80401, USA Simple Summary: This article provides a comprehensive review of new and emerging treatment strategies against multiple myeloma that employ precision medicines and/or drugs capable of improving the ability of the immune system to prevent or slow down the progression of multiple myeloma. These rationally designed new treatment methods have the potential to change the therapeutic landscape in multiple myeloma and improve the long-term survival outcome. Abstract: SeverFigurel cellular elements of the bone marrow (BM) microenvironment in multiple myeloma (MM) patients contribute to the immune evasion, proliferation, and drug resistance of MM cells, including myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), tumor-associated M2-like, “alter- natively activated” macrophages, CD38+ regulatory B-cells (Bregs), and regulatory T-cells (Tregs). These immunosuppressive elements in bidirectional and multi-directional crosstalk with each other inhibit both memory and cytotoxic effector T-cell populations as well as natural killer (NK) cells. Immunomodulatory imide drugs (IMiDs), protease inhibitors (PI), monoclonal antibodies (MoAb), Citation: Uckun, F.M. Overcoming the Immunosuppressive Tumor adoptive T-cell/NK cell therapy, and inhibitors of anti-apoptotic signaling pathways have emerged as Microenvironment in Multiple promising therapeutic platforms that can be employed in various combinations as part of a rationally Myeloma.
  • Fund Holdings

    Fund Holdings

    Wilmington International Fund as of 7/31/2021 (Portfolio composition is subject to change) ISSUER NAME % OF ASSETS ISHARES MSCI CANADA ETF 3.48% TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING CO LTD 2.61% DREYFUS GOVT CASH MGMT-I 1.83% SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD 1.79% SPDR S&P GLOBAL NATURAL RESOURCES ETF 1.67% MSCI INDIA FUTURE SEP21 1.58% TENCENT HOLDINGS LTD 1.39% ASML HOLDING NV 1.29% DSV PANALPINA A/S 0.99% HDFC BANK LTD 0.86% AIA GROUP LTD 0.86% ALIBABA GROUP HOLDING LTD 0.82% TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES CO LTD 0.79% JAMES HARDIE INDUSTRIES PLC 0.78% DREYFUS GOVT CASH MGMT-I 0.75% INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG 0.74% SIKA AG 0.72% NOVO NORDISK A/S 0.71% BHP GROUP LTD 0.69% PARTNERS GROUP HOLDING AG 0.65% NAVER CORP 0.61% HUTCHMED CHINA LTD 0.59% LVMH MOET HENNESSY LOUIS VUITTON SE 0.59% TOYOTA MOTOR CORP 0.59% HEXAGON AB 0.57% SAP SE 0.57% SK MATERIALS CO LTD 0.55% MEDIATEK INC 0.55% ADIDAS AG 0.54% ZALANDO SE 0.54% RIO TINTO LTD 0.52% MERIDA INDUSTRY CO LTD 0.52% HITACHI LTD 0.51% CSL LTD 0.51% SONY GROUP CORP 0.50% ATLAS COPCO AB 0.49% DASSAULT SYSTEMES SE 0.49% OVERSEA-CHINESE BANKING CORP LTD 0.49% KINGSPAN GROUP PLC 0.48% L'OREAL SA 0.48% ASSA ABLOY AB 0.46% JD.COM INC 0.46% RESMED INC 0.44% COLOPLAST A/S 0.44% CRODA INTERNATIONAL PLC 0.41% AUSTRALIA & NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LTD 0.41% STRAUMANN HOLDING AG 0.41% AMBU A/S 0.40% LG CHEM LTD 0.40% LVMH MOET HENNESSY LOUIS VUITTON SE 0.39% SOFTBANK GROUP CORP 0.39% NOVARTIS AG 0.38% HONDA MOTOR CO LTD 0.37% TOMRA SYSTEMS ASA 0.37% IMCD NV 0.37% HONG KONG EXCHANGES & CLEARING LTD 0.36% AGC INC 0.36% ADYEN
  • Translation of Financial Statements As of 31 December 2020 And

    Translation of Financial Statements As of 31 December 2020 And

    Translation of Financial Statements as of 31 December 2020 and Management Report Evotec SE Exhibit 1 Evotec SE, Hamburg Statement of financial position as of 31 December 2020 Assets 31.12.2020 31.12.2019 Equity and liabilities 31.12.2020 31.12.2019 EUR EUR EUR EUR A. Equity A. Fixed assets I. Subscribed capital 163.914.741,00 150.902.578,00 I. Intangible assets ./. nominal value Treasury shares -249.915,00 -249.915,00 Purchased franchises, industrial and similar rights 163.664.826,00 150.652.663,00 and assets, and licenses in such rights and assets 1.194.857,45 4.082.552,01 II. Capital reserves 482.139.820,51 243.587.164,27 II. Property, plant and equipment III. Reserve for treasury shares 249.915,00 249.915,00 1. Land, land rights and buildings, including buildings on third-party land 1.572.345,71 1.804.727,38 IV. Accumulated loss -100.132.424,27 -75.948.394,50 2. Plant and machinery 12.251.848,90 11.732.420,10 3. Other equipment, furniture and fixtures 1.160.417,33 1.035.981,29 545.922.137,24 318.541.347,77 4. Prepayments and assets under construction 1.315.392,83 1.118.311,65 16.300.004,77 15.691.440,42 III. Financial assets B. Provisions 1. Shares in affiliates 334.222.810,07 334.187.810,07 1. Provisions for pensions and similar obligations 169.091,00 166.780,00 2. Loans to affiliates 132.335.498,54 2.
  • Drug Discovery - Yesterday and Tomorrow: the Common Approaches in Drug Design and Cancer

    Drug Discovery - Yesterday and Tomorrow: the Common Approaches in Drug Design and Cancer

    Cell & Cellular Life Sciences Journal Drug Discovery - Yesterday and Tomorrow: The Common Approaches in Drug Design and Cancer 1,2 1 3 Hamad ON *, Amran SIB and Sabbah AM Mini Review 1Faculty of Bioscience & Medical Engineering, Malaysia Volume 3 Issue 1 2University of Wasit, College of Medicine, Iraq Received Date: February 27, 2018 3Forensic DNA for research and training Centre, Al Nahrain University, Iraq Published Date: April 03, 2018 *Corresponding author: Oras Naji Hamad, Faculty of Bioscience & Medical Engineering, University of Technology, Malaysia, Tel: 01121715960; E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The process of drug discovery has undergone radical changes and development over years. Traditionally, the drugs were discovered by employing chemistry and pharmacology-based cautious approach. When natural products were the most important source of drugs or drug precursors, but the conventional randomized drug research phenomenon was no longer effective at that time due to many negatives of these approaches like: high expenses of discovering new drugs, time-consuming and reduced success guarantee. Thus, with the development of the era, the concept of “Rational Drug Design” has enabled drug target identification and validation to be more specific. In addition, several novel technologies and approaches have been introducing economics, proteomics and other omics areas such as 3D QSAR, pharmacophore modeling and other, which playing a promising role in accelerating the pace of drug discovery process. Their view of the current
  • FACTSHEET - AS of 28-Sep-2021 Solactive Mittelstand & Midcap Deutschland Index (TRN)

    FACTSHEET - AS of 28-Sep-2021 Solactive Mittelstand & Midcap Deutschland Index (TRN)

    FACTSHEET - AS OF 28-Sep-2021 Solactive Mittelstand & MidCap Deutschland Index (TRN) DESCRIPTION The Index reflects the net total return performance of 70 medium/smaller capitalisation companies incorporated in Germany. Weights are based on free float market capitalisation and are increased if significant holdings in a company can be attributed to currentmgmtor company founders. HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Jan-2010 Jan-2012 Jan-2014 Jan-2016 Jan-2018 Jan-2020 Jan-2022 Solactive Mittelstand & MidCap Deutschland Index (TRN) CHARACTERISTICS ISIN / WKN DE000SLA1MN9 / SLA1MN Base Value / Base Date 100 Points / 19.09.2008 Bloomberg / Reuters MTTLSTRN Index / .MTTLSTRN Last Price 342.52 Index Calculator Solactive AG Dividends Included (Performance Index) Index Type Equity Calculation 08:00am to 06:00pm (CET), every 15 seconds Index Currency EUR History Available daily back to 19.09.2008 Index Members 70 FACTSHEET - AS OF 28-Sep-2021 Solactive Mittelstand & MidCap Deutschland Index (TRN) STATISTICS 30D 90D 180D 360D YTD Since Inception Performance -3.69% 3.12% 7.26% 27.72% 12.73% 242.52% Performance (p.a.) - - - - - 9.91% Volatility (p.a.) 13.05% 12.12% 12.48% 13.60% 12.90% 21.43% High 357.49 357.49 357.49 357.49 357.49 357.49 Low 342.52 329.86 315.93 251.01 305.77 52.12 Sharpe Ratio -2.77 1.14 1.27 2.11 1.40 0.49 Max. Drawdown -4.19% -4.19% -4.19% -9.62% -5.56% -47.88% VaR 95 \ 99 -21.5% \ -35.8% -34.5% \ -64.0% CVaR 95 \ 99 -31.5% \ -46.8% -53.5% \ -89.0% COMPOSITION BY CURRENCIES COMPOSITION BY COUNTRIES EUR 100.0% DE
  • The Impact of Early ADME Profiling on Drug Discovery and Development Strategy

    The Impact of Early ADME Profiling on Drug Discovery and Development Strategy

    ADME Profiling The impact of early ADME profiling on drug discovery and development strategy The increased costs in the discovery and development of new drugs, due in part to the high attrition rate of drug candidates in development, has led to a new strategy to introduce early, parallel evaluation of efficacy and biopharmaceutical properties of drug candidates. Investigation of terminated projects revealed that the primary cause for drug failure in the development phase was the poor pharmacokinetic and ADMET (Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Discretion and Toxicity) properties rather than unsatisfactory efficacy. In addition, the applications of parallel synthesis and combinatory chemistry to expedite lead finding and lead optimisation processes has shifted the chemical libraries towards poorer biopharmaceutical properties. Establishments of high throughput and fast ADMET profiling assays allow for the prioritisation of leads or drug candidates by their biopharmaceutical properties in parallel with optimisation of their efficacy at early discovery phases.This is expected to not only improve the overall quality of drug candidates and therefore the probability of their success, but also shorten the drug discovery and development process. In this article, we review the early ADME profiling approach, their timing in relation to the entire drug discovery and development process and the latest technologies of the selected assays will be reviewed. iscovery and development of a new drug is a lead finding/selection process, which in general takes By Dr Jianling Wang long, labour-demanding process. Recent a minimum of two more years. Typically, the whole and Dr Laszlo Urban Dstudies1 revealed that the average time to process is fragmented into ‘Discovery’, ‘Development’ discover, develop and approve a new drug in the and ‘Registration’ phases.
  • Evotec OAI AG Annual Report 2004 'Taking the Lead'

    Evotec OAI AG Annual Report 2004 'Taking the Lead'

    Evotec OAI AG Annual Report 2004 ‘taking the lead’ Segment overview Evotec OAI operates through three Discovery Programs business divisions: Division (DPD) > Discovery Programs Division: Evotec OAI’s Discovery Programs Division proprietary drug candidates (DPD) is developing a deep portfolio of > Discovery and Development proprietary drug candidates. With years Services: contract research and of experience in assay development, development screening, chemistry and optimisation, > Tools and Technologies|Evotec Evotec OAI has established a strong Technologies: technologies and track record of successfully identifying instruments such candidates for its customers. In its proprietary research DPD has built up extensive knowledge about diseas- es of the central nervous system (CNS) through Evotec Neurosciences (ENS) and about metabolic disorders through the joint venture with DeveloGen. Through the acquisition of full ownership interest in ENS in March 2005, the Com- pany has now established its own attrac- tive CNS pipeline. DPD plans to rapidly progress the current programmes, to ex- pand these activities and to engage in early partnerships and|or out-license the drugs at proof-of-concept to the pharma- ceutical industry which is continuously searching for novel drug candidates to fill their clinical development pipelines. Discovery and Development Tools and Technologies Services (DDS) (Evotec Technologies|ET) Evotec OAI’s Discovery and Development Evotec Technologies (ET) is developing Services (DDS) division provides drug innovative drug discovery technolo- discovery contract research and develop- gies and instruments for the pharmaceu- ment support to a large group of global tical and biotechnology industries customers and to Evotec OAI’s internal and academic research institutions. The research in the Discovery Programs Company provides cutting-edge solu- Division.
  • Setting Fair Prices for Life-Saving Drugs by Bruce A

    Setting Fair Prices for Life-Saving Drugs by Bruce A

    Virtual Mentor American Medical Association Journal of Ethics January 2007, Volume 9, Number 1: 38-43. Policy forum Setting fair prices for life-saving drugs by Bruce A. Chabner, MD, and Thomas G. Roberts Jr., MD, MSocSci Cancer drugs are big business. Worldwide sales are projected to reach $25 billion in 2006 and to increase to almost $50 billion by 2010 [1]. This represents a startling growth in a segment of the drug industry once shunned by major pharmaceutical manufacturers as too high-risk and unprofitable. While a few drug companies, notably Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) and Pharmatalia, made significant profits on cancer drugs between 1970 and 1990 when the first effective combination therapies came into common practice, the turning point in this industrial segment occurred in 1992 with the approval of Bristol-Myers Squibb’s paclitaxel, which became a multibillion-dollar-per-year product by 1998. To understand our current concerns with cancer drug costs and their potential effect on medical care financing and access, one needs to be familiar with the paclitaxel experience. The story of paclitaxel’s discovery and commercial development reflects both the lack of interest that industry had in cancer drugs at that time and the sudden emergence of drug cost as a social justice issue. In 1964 Monroe Wall and associates, working at the Research Triangle Institute under a National Cancer Institute (NCI) contract, isolated the active compound in paclitaxel from the bark of the common yew tree [2]. Its tortuous development, complicated by difficulties in material procurement, compound purification and formulation, delayed its entry into clinical trials until 1983, and its efficacy in treating ovarian cancer was not demonstrated until 1987 [3].