) -- When i it comes to reverse stock splits, I'm willing to give biotech CEOs a single mulligan. We all know drug development is rooted in failure so even well-meaning biotech CEOs land in Wall Street's doghouse.
Generosity ends when a biotech implements a second reverse stock split, particularly if it's done under the same leadership team. Shareholders deserve better, so any CEO manning the helm for two reverse splits should be fired.
was an unrepentant violator of this rule, which is why the company filed for bankruptcy. Twenty-four years of drug development futility and five reverse stock splits reduced 15 million Genta shares down to one.
is a close second with four reverse stocks split totaling 1 for 1,200 shares. Cell Therapeutics went public in 1996 at $10 per share, which equates to a reverse split-adjusted, first-day trading price of $12,000 per share. Today, a Cell Therapeutics' stock trades for $1.08.
I'll do the math for you. In 17 years, Cell Therapeutics has lost 99.991% of its value.
James Bianco, Cell Therapeutics' Chairman and CEO, has been in charge through all four of the reverse stock splits, yet his tenure never appears in jeopardy due to a cowardly, self-interested board of directors.
Habitual drug-development blowups and an unquenchable thirst for capital are typically the reasons most biotech companies become reverse stock split addicts. Cell Therapeutics certainly fits this mold. Those with good memories will recall the company was founded on the promise of lisofylline, a treatment for oral mucositis. It failed. So did the cancer drug CT-2584. Xyotax, a reformulation of the popular chemotherapy drug Taxol, was a huge failure. Instead of disappearing from its pipeline like CT-2584, Cell Therapeutics merely changed Xyotax's name to Opaxio. Brostallicin is another drug that came and went without a trace.
With $1.8 billion in cumulative losses and drug failure after failure, it's no surprise Cell Therapeutics has become reliant on reverse stock splits.
Cell Therapeutics did manage to win conditional approval in Europe for the lymphoma drug Pixuvri last year. Consider it a financially insignificant achievement. The drug is still not available commercially a year later. Efforts to get Pixuri approved in the U.S. have been futile, highlighted by a unanimous vote against the drug by an FDA advisory panel and vapid threats to sue the agency.
Pacritinib, an oral JAK2 inhibitor for myelofibrosis, is the latest drug to leapfrog to the front of Cell Therapeutics' pipeline. The company is pushing pacritinib into phase III studies and recently raised $60 million to fund the new clinical work.
Pacritinib's mechanism is similar to Jakafi, an approved drug marketed by
. Cell Therapeutics claims pacritinib is more specific to the JAK2 target, thereby making it potentially more effective and better tolerated.
Actual data don't yet prove the company's assertions but it should be noted the JAK2 field is very crowded. Among the competitors:
in pivotal studies and
, which acquired
and its phase III ready JAK2 compound. Good luck to Cell Therapeutics with that competition.