Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccination of vaccines in conflict with university ahead of planned scholarship

The nine-hundred-year-old Oxford is wrestling with how to rewrite his rules for promoting companies created by academics or born in his labs, while being left with one that has been put in the spotlight by the pandemic. According to people close to the plans and marketing documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, Vaccitech Ltd., potential investors, laid an indication of a stock in New York earlier this year.

Investors expect an IPO valuation of about $ 700 million, with Vaccitech expected to be a $ 1 billion business by the end of the year. Big investors like pharmaceutical giant Gilead Sciences Inc.

and Lilly Asia Ventures, a venture capital arm owned by drugmaker Eli Lilly & Co. relinquished, according to people familiar with the matter and documents reviewed by the Journal, expressed interest in investments.

Vaccitech CEO Bill Enright declined to comment, as did a Gilead spokesman. Lilly Asia Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.

Vaccitech is among a handful of once obscure biotechnologies that found their moment in the pandemic. However, Vaccitech has not yet capitalized on its role. Some investors were nervous about sensational obstacles in rolling out the shot and early negative perceptions about its effectiveness compared to other vaccines.

There’s another catch. According to people familiar with the long-standing tension between the startup and Oxford, it has created new barriers in the complicated fundraising process. The people said that plans for an IPO were still in check and that it could still fall apart.

The university owns about 10% of the startup. According to these people, Vaccitech, its bankers and lawyers have so far unsuccessfully sought access to Oxford’s exclusive Covid-19 vaccine contract with AstraZeneca. The treaty was signed last spring when the drugmaker agreed to make and distribute the Oxford vaccine. Vaccitech and its advisers argued that the document sets out financial and legal obligations that are key to valuing the company fairly and for disclosure of regulations.

According to Oxford, Oxford and Vaccitech separately talk about telling the role of the company in the development of the vaccine. Vaccitech wants Oxford’s imprimatur to market the early work of scientists with Oxford in inventing the vaccine and its help to speed up the production of early clinical trials and provide safety data for regulators, according to people familiar with the matter and related correspondence seen by the Journal. The two parties also briefly wrestled over where to list, with some Oxford-affiliated investors prefer London. Vaccitech executives insisted on Nasdaq in New York.

Oxford did not respond to requests for comment. AstraZeneca declined to comment.

Before Covid-19, Vaccitech was a little-known biotechnology company that focused in part on vaccines – a low-profile field until last year. Oxford’s support has helped keep the company afloat. The Covid-19 shot has given new credibility to Vaccitech’s own series of vaccinations and therapies, which are still in clinical trials, aimed at fighting other viruses and cancers.

The conflict is spreading as Oxford seeks to revamp the way it supports new ventures, such as Vaccitech, which seeks to turn science and technology into shareholder returns. The refurbishment is part of Oxford’s years of striving to better compete with leading American schools such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University to attract money and talent for startups.

Vaccitech was co-founded in 2016 by two Oxford scientists who are now at the heart of the vaccine’s development. They have created key technology that supports the shot, by using a modified cold chimpanzee virus to transport genetic material into human cells to trigger immunity. Vaccitech owns the rights to the technology.

Executives and investors believe the Covid-19 shot shows the potential of Vaccitech’s technology to fight hepatitis B, prostate cancer and human papillomavirus – global health problems with large markets for effective treatments. Vaccitech scientists believe that the so-called viral vector technology used in the Covid-19 vaccine could unlock other therapies and weapons against infection, some of which may be licensed to large drug companies.

Human trials of the Oxford-AstraZeneca that were shot last year – and since then real-world evidence – have shown that it works against Covid-19, preventing deaths and serious illnesses. But the trials also yielded a confusing spectrum of results that created negative perceptions about its effectiveness compared to other vaccines. AstraZeneca was also defending over the shortage of doses it said it would deliver to Europe by this month.

Other biotechnology companies behind Covid-19 vaccines have hit fundraising gold. German CureVac NV raised more than $ 200 million in a stock debut in August that valued it at more than $ 2 billion. It has skyrocketed over the past $ 15 billion as the vaccine reaches the final stage of the trials. Shares of Novavax Inc.,

which has struggled for years to produce a marketable vaccine has increased as it closes the U.S. authorization of its Covid-19 vaccine.

Vaccitech has relinquished direct rights to Oxford’s Covid-19 vaccine and instead stands at 24% of the royalties Oxford receives from AstraZeneca’s vaccine sales, the Journal reported earlier.

The value of Vaccitech rests to a small extent on possible future royalties of the Covid-19 vaccine, but much more on the plans to adapt the vaccine technology to fight other diseases. According to the marketing documents, it takes at least three to four years to produce fruit. Investors previously valued the company at £ 100 million, equivalent to $ 138.4 million, but according to updated, non-public figures, it is now worth more than $ 250 million.

Vaccitech’s IPO plans form a test case for Oxford’s run-off process. The university has supported more than 200 new ventures since the late 1980s, but the record of promoting big money makers has drawn leading American institutions. Now the British university is sharpening its existing roll-out rules, according to non-public communications reviewed by the Journal and people familiar with the process.

In 2015, Oxford set up its own venture, Oxford Sciences Innovation PLC, and raised about $ 800 million from outside investors. Oxford owns 5% of OSI and aims to take a 50% stake in promising businesses, giving half automatically to OSI. Oxford has since downgraded its founding share to an average of around 28%, and it wants to further reduce it for future beginners, say people close to the process, in an effort to attract more founders and outside investors. OSI declined to comment.

Oxford’s large initial interests could give an extraordinary swing in the university’s ventures, even after other investors diluted the investments. Oxford and OSI, with a 40% stake in Vaccitech, have finally pushed biotechnology to inoculate its 50% stake in intellectual property to enable the AstraZeneca deal, the Journal reported earlier. Vaccitech was also excluded from the negotiations with AstraZeneca.

AstraZeneca has publicly promised to deliver three billion non-profit doses this year. At the time of the partnership agreement, private communications showed, OSI told Vaccitech that, like Oxford, it is not eligible for royalties while Covid-19 remains a pandemic, and for a period of 12 months thereafter.

Vaccitech supporters seeking access to the contract now want clarity on the full terms Oxford has reached with regard to royalty payments and any other benefits, once AstraZeneca benefits from doses.

Write to Jenny Strasburg by [email protected]