GSK shares fall after blood cancer drug likely headed for U.S. rejection
The British drugmaker was trying to revive the drug, which was pulled from U.S. markets in 2022 after failing a late-stage study. GSK's renewed application is based on two late-stage trials showing that Blenrep, when used in combination, improved overall survival in patients.
The setback from the U.S. FDA advisory vote comes at a time when GSK is focusing on expanding its pipeline to offset declining sales from top drugs and vaccines.
The company's shares fell as much as 7% to 1,315 pence, and were the top percentage loser on London's blue-chip FTSE 100 (.FTSE), opens new tab index, which was up 0.2%.
The FDA is due to give a formal decision on Blenrep next week, and analysts at Berenberg and JPMorgan said the regulator is unlikely to approve it then.
The FDA typically follows the advice of its advisory panels, though it is not bound to do so.
"GSK remains confident in the benefit/risk profile of Blenrep and will continue to work closely with the FDA as they complete their review for Blenrep," the company had said in a statement on Thursday.
The company has forecast peak annual sales for Blenrep, chemically called belantamab mafodotin, of over 3 billion pounds ($4 billion). The therapy is currently under review for approval in more than 10 countries.
Including Friday's losses, GSK shares are down about 2% for the year.
($1 = 0.7449 pounds)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
Water regulation should be overhauled, review recommends
The system for regulating water companies should be overhauled and Ofwat replaced, a landmark review of the sector has advised. The much-anticipated final report from the Independent Water Commission, led by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, outlined 88 recommendations to the UK and Welsh governments to turn around the ailing industry. The Government-commissioned team was tasked to carry out the largest review of the sector since privatisation in the face of widespread public anger over pollution, bills and bosses' bonuses, although ministers ruled out nationalising water companies. Water minister Emma Hardy told broadcasters on Monday that the system is 'broken', but did not commit to how many of the 88 suggestions would be accepted by Whitehall. The report, published on Monday morning, recommended far-reaching changes to the way the water system is regulated as it called the current landscape 'fragmented and overlapping'. For England, proposals include abolishing Ofwat, which oversees how much water companies in England and Wales can charge for services, and the Drinking Water Inspectorate, which ensures that public water supplies are safe. The report also advises removing the regulatory roles of the Environment Agency and Natural England, which monitor the sector's impact on nature, such as companies illegally dumping sewage into waterways. Instead, a 'joined-up' and 'powerful' single integrated water regulator should be established, according to the recommendations. In Wales, Ofwat's economic responsibilities would be integrated into Natural Resources Wales, the review said. Ms Hardy told BBC Breakfast that ministers would be taking 'a proper look' at the paper 'all the way through the summer'. Asked if all the recommendations would be made law, she told the programme: 'What we'll do is we'll have a proper look at it all the way through the summer and the intention is that we're going to introduce a White Paper to spell out exactly what we're going to do on water reform.' Ms Hardy said that the Government would 'introduce a water Bill next year, which will change the law', but added: 'Exactly how many out of the 88 we're going to do or not going to do, then we'll work that out in the next few months.' The current system has faced intense criticism for overseeing water companies during the years they paid out shareholders and accrued large debts while ageing infrastructure crumbled and sewage spills skyrocketed. Author Sir Jon said the review has 'tried to attack the problem from all sides' but warned that bills are going to rise by 30% over the next five years. 'There are some inescapable facts here,' he said. 'The cost of producing water and dealing with our wastewater is going up.' Sir Jon later told Times Radio that regulators have failed to work together to make the sector deliver and blamed the Government for not giving clear direction. 'It's the failure of Government to balance out all the different pressures on water,' he said, adding that firms 'need to perform better' and 'be funded to invest'. The Government backed the commission's findings, with Ms Hardy saying consumers have been 'failed time and time again'. Speaking on Times Radio, she said 'root-and-branch reform' is needed to fix the crisis and told listeners the Government is considering a piece of primary legislation to deliver many of the proposed changes. Ms Hardy also described trust in the water industry as at 'the lowest ever level' and criticised executives for handing out pay rises and bonuses. 'Everyone knows the system is broken,' she said. 'And they give themselves huge pay rises.' However, the minister also ruled out supporting Government intervention to cap pay in the private sector. Ms Hardy said: 'I don't think as Government we should say what private companies should pay. 'But I will say – read the room. Look how angry and furious people are.' Other key recommendations in the review include: – Expanding the role of the voluntary Consumer Council for Water into an ombudsman to give stronger protection to customers and a clearer route to resolving complaints. – Significant improvements to environmental regulation, including the process where companies collect and analyse wastewater discharges they make into waterways, by introducing more digitalisation, automation, third-party assurance and inspections. – Tightening oversight of water company ownership and governance through measures such as new regulatory powers to block changes to water company ownership and 'minimum capital' requirements so that companies are less reliant on debt. – Introducing legislative reforms to better manage public health risks in water, recognising the many people who swim, surf and enjoy other water-based activities. – Fundamentally resetting economic regulation, including a new 'supervisory' approach that supports tailored decisions and earlier interventions in water company oversight.
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
DWP reveals deadline for thousands of benefit claimants owed compensation after court battle
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has provided a new update for tens of thousands of benefit claimants still due a compensation payment this year. The payments are being made to people with disabilities who were moved from 'legacy benefits' such as Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) to universal credit in the years before transitional protections were introduced. These claimants were found to have lost the 'Severe Disability Premium' (SDP) in the move, with the DWP not doing enough to ensure their incomes were protected. Most of the 57,000 people affected by the issue have now received their compensation. However, the department has said it is working to clear approximately 13,000 cases which are more complex. Explaining the issue in its annual report, the DWP stated: 'Unfortunately, some underpayments may be owed to customers who no longer have an active ESA claim and restrictions in data make it difficult to identify, assess and correct these errors.' The department said it was working to complete the work on these errors by September. While agents are proactively contacting those eligible for compensation, anyone who thinks they may have been affected to make a claim. The department said it will assess claims on a case-by-case basis based on the evidence given. The repayment scheme follows two rulings by the High Court between 2018 and 2019, which found the government failed to ensure the benefit payments of affected claimants weren't reduced when they transitioned. In 2020, the DWP made a failed attempt to challenge these rulings at the Court of Appeal. It was found that the monthly loss of income in both cases amounted to around £180. Law firm Leigh Day – who brought the cases – estimates that compensation could be worth more than £5,000 per person. The DWP has confirmed that the total cost of the repayment exercise is £452m. A DWP spokesperson said: 'We are fully committed to identifying claimants that are owed arrears and providing the financial support to which they are entitled as quickly as possible, with the majority of these cases having already been resolved. "We are clear that errors like this one should not happen and have already taken action to avoid future errors.' Eligibility To be eligible for compensation, a claimant must be receiving (or had previously received) Universal Credit that includes a transitional SDP, or would have done, had it not been eroded. They must then have met one of three more conditions immediately before their move to Universal Credit: They were entitled to an income-based legacy benefit that included an Enhanced Disability Premium They were entitled to an income-based legacy benefit that included the Disability Premium They were entitled to an income-based legacy benefit that included the Disabled Child Premium, or Child Tax Credit which included the Disabled Child Element (non-severely disabled category) Payment rates There are five possible payment rates, which will be made for each month between the claimant's transition to Universal Credit and when new income protection regulations came into force in February 2024. These back payments will be calculated by giving claimants what they would have been entitled to had the new rules been in place when they transitioned. The monthly rates are:
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
BP appoints former CRH boss Albert Manifold as new chairman
BP has named the former boss of building materials firm CRH as its incoming chairman, replacing Helge Lund after a difficult past few years in the role. Albert Manifold, who was chief executive of CRH for 10 years until last December, will join the oil giant as chairman-elect on September 1 before taking over as chairman on October 1. Mr Lund had announced plans in April to step down 'in due course', but the group said it would probably take until 2026 to find his successor. Shares in BP lifted 1% in early morning trading. Aviva chief executive Dame Amanda Blanc, BP's senior independent director who led the hunt for Mr Lund's successor, said Mr Manifold was 'the ideal candidate to oversee BP's next chapter'. She said: 'Albert has a relentless focus on performance which is well suited to BP's needs now and into the future. 'He transformed and refocused CRH into a global leader.' CRH, which has its headquarters in Ireland, switched its stock market listing from London to New York in 2023 and has since seen its share price rocket by 74%. Speculation has swirled over whether BP will move its London listing to Wall Street after activist investor Elliott Management built up a stake in the group. But BP chief executive Murray Auchincloss has previously dismissed the rumours, saying in April the group had no plans to change its listing. Mr Lund has been chairman since 2019, but he has presided over a more challenging past few years for the firm. He oversaw the hiring of former chief executive Bernard Looney, who quit in September 2023 after failing to disclose his past relationships with company colleagues. Mr Lund also played a key part in overseeing the group setting its net zero agenda, but the firm has since rowed back on the shift towards green energy. BP bowed to pressure from shareholders by vowing to accelerate investment in oil and gas while slashing renewable spending by nearly three-quarters. In a major rebuttal for a FTSE 100 company, Mr Lund received a near 25% vote against his re-election at the firm's annual general meeting in April. Ahead of the AGM, a group of 48 institutional investors had criticised the board for not offering a direct vote on the oil major's revised strategy, while environmental groups fiercely criticised the climate row-back. The vote was largely seen as a protest, as Mr Lund had already announced his departure at the time of the AGM.
