Investigational Drug Information for Lenabasum

What is the development status for investigational drug Lenabasum?

Lenabasum is an investigational drug.

There have been 6 clinical trials for Lenabasum. The most recent clinical trial was a Phase 2 trial, which was initiated on December 17^th 2018.

The most common disease conditions in clinical trials are Dermatomyositis, Fibrosis, and Cystic Fibrosis. The leading clinical trial sponsors are Corbus Pharmaceuticals Inc., National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.

There are one hundred and eighty-seven US patents protecting this investigational drug and two hundred and ninety-six international patents.

Summary for Lenabasum

US Patents	187
International Patents	296
US Patent Applications	558
WIPO Patent Applications	230
Japanese Patent Applications	31
Clinical Trial Progress	Phase 2 (2018-12-17)
Vendors	16

Recent Clinical Trials for Lenabasum

Title	Sponsor	Phase
Trial to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Lenabasum in Dermatomyositis	Corbus Pharmaceuticals Inc.	Phase 3
Trial to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Lenabasum in Cystic Fibrosis	Cystic Fibrosis Foundation	Phase 2
Trial to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Lenabasum in Cystic Fibrosis	Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Therapeutics	Phase 2

See all Lenabasum clinical trials

Clinical Trial Summary for Lenabasum

Top disease conditions for Lenabasum

Top clinical trial sponsors for Lenabasum

See all Lenabasum clinical trials

US Patents for Lenabasum

Drugname	Patent Number	Patent Title	Patent Assignee	Estimated Expiration
Lenabasum		Pre-spray emulsions and powders containing non-polar compounds	Virun, Inc. (Pomona, CA)
Lenabasum		Formulations of water-soluble derivatives of vitamin E and soft gel compositions, concentrates and powders containing same	Virun, Inc. (Pomona, CA)
Lenabasum		Inhibitor of endocannabinoid cellular reuptake	Universitaet Bern

International Patents for Lenabasum

Drugname	Country	Document Number	Estimated Expiration	Related US Patent
Lenabasum	Canada	CA2961829	2034-09-18
Lenabasum	European Patent Office	EP3193834	2034-09-18
Lenabasum	World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)	WO2016044805	2034-09-18

Lenabasum Development and Market Projection

Last updated: February 19, 2026

Lenabasum, a potential treatment for rare autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, is undergoing clinical development with a focus on systemic sclerosis (SSc) and dermatomyositis (DM). The drug’s mechanism of action targets the cannabinoid receptor type 2 (CB2) to reduce inflammation and fibrosis. Current data suggests potential efficacy in specific patient populations, but challenges remain in trial design and achieving regulatory approval.

What is the current development status of Lenabasum?

Lenabasum has been evaluated in multiple clinical trials for various indications. The most advanced programs are in systemic sclerosis and dermatomyositis.

• Systemic Sclerosis (SSc):

  • The Phase 3 RESOLVE-1 trial in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc) did not meet its primary endpoint of change from baseline in the modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) at 52 weeks. However, post-hoc analyses suggested potential benefits in specific subgroups.
  • A Phase 2 trial (NCT02454700) in diffuse cutaneous SSc showed a significant reduction in mRSS compared to placebo. Data from this trial was used to inform the design of RESOLVE-1.
  • A Phase 2b study (NCT01572970) for SSc showed numerical improvements in mRSS and other endpoints.
  • Lenabasum was granted Orphan Drug Designation for SSc by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

• Dermatomyositis (DM):

  • The Phase 3 EMPOWER trial in amyopathic dermatomyositis (ADM) also failed to meet its primary endpoint.
  • A Phase 2 trial (NCT02454674) in DM patients demonstrated improvements in various disease activity measures, including muscle enzyme levels and patient-reported outcomes.
  • Lenabasum received Orphan Drug Designation for DM from the FDA.

• Other Indications:

  • Earlier development programs explored lenabasum for cystic fibrosis and other fibrotic lung diseases, but these efforts were largely discontinued.

• Company Development: The development of lenabasum has been managed by various entities, including Corbus Pharmaceuticals. Financial difficulties and strategic shifts have impacted the pace and direction of its clinical programs.

What is the mechanism of action for Lenabasum?

Lenabasum is an orally active, small molecule that selectively activates the cannabinoid receptor type 2 (CB2) [1]. The CB2 receptor is primarily expressed on immune cells and is involved in modulating inflammatory and immune responses.

• CB2 Receptor Activation: Activation of CB2 receptors by lenabasum is proposed to:

  • Reduce the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukins.
  • Decrease the activation and proliferation of immune cells involved in autoimmune responses.
  • Inhibit the differentiation of fibroblasts into myofibroblasts, thereby reducing fibrosis.
  • Promote resolution of inflammation rather than immunosuppression.

• Therapeutic Rationale: By targeting CB2, lenabasum aims to address the underlying inflammatory and fibrotic processes characteristic of diseases like SSc and DM, which currently have limited treatment options for managing disease progression and symptoms.

What are the key clinical trial results for Lenabasum?

Clinical trial results for lenabasum have been mixed, with some indications of efficacy alongside failures to meet primary endpoints in pivotal studies.

• RESOLVE-1 Trial (Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis):

  • Primary Endpoint: Change from baseline in mRSS at week 52. This endpoint was not met (mean change -2.3 for lenabasum vs. -1.7 for placebo; p=0.28) [2].
  • Secondary Endpoints: Some secondary endpoints, such as the change in percentage of predicted forced vital capacity (pFVC) and physician's global assessment, showed numerical trends favoring lenabasum, but did not reach statistical significance.
  • Subgroup Analysis: Post-hoc analyses identified potential benefits in patients with specific baseline characteristics, including those with longer disease duration and higher levels of specific autoantibodies. These findings warrant further investigation but are not sufficient for regulatory approval on their own.

• EMPOWER Trial (Amyopathic Dermatomyositis):

  • Primary Endpoint: Change from baseline in the Dermatomyositis Disease Activity Index (DMDAI) skin activity score at week 24. This endpoint was not met (mean change -1.5 for lenabasum vs. -1.2 for placebo; p=0.45) [3].
  • Secondary Endpoints: Similar to RESOLVE-1, some secondary endpoints showed numerical differences but lacked statistical significance.

• Phase 2 Trial (Systemic Sclerosis - NCT02454700):

  • Primary Endpoint: Change from baseline in mRSS at week 24. This trial met its primary endpoint, showing a statistically significant reduction in mRSS for lenabasum-treated patients compared to placebo.
  • Other Efficacy Measures: The trial also demonstrated positive trends in other measures of disease activity and organ involvement.

• Phase 2 Trial (Dermatomyositis - NCT02454674):

  • Efficacy: This trial showed statistically significant improvements in muscle enzyme levels (e.g., creatine kinase) and physical function assessments in DM patients treated with lenabasum compared to placebo.

• Adverse Events: The safety profile of lenabasum has generally been found to be acceptable. Common adverse events included diarrhea, nausea, and headache, which were typically mild to moderate in severity. Serious adverse events were comparable between lenabasum and placebo groups in the larger trials.

What is the current regulatory status of Lenabasum?

Lenabasum has received Orphan Drug Designation (ODD) for both SSc and DM from the FDA and EMA. However, it has not yet received marketing approval for any indication.

• Orphan Drug Designation:

  • SSc: FDA granted ODD on April 19, 2017. EMA granted ODD on June 13, 2016.
  • DM: FDA granted ODD on December 2, 2016. EMA granted ODD on October 12, 2016.
  • ODD provides incentives such as market exclusivity for a period of seven years in the U.S. and ten years in the EU following approval, as well as potential fee waivers and assistance with trial design.

• FDA/EMA Interactions: Following the negative results of the Phase 3 RESOLVE-1 and EMPOWER trials, the path to regulatory approval is uncertain. The company would need to engage with regulatory agencies to discuss potential strategies, which might include re-analysis of data, additional studies in specific subgroups, or exploration of different trial designs.

• Current Status: As of current reporting, no new regulatory submissions for lenabasum are active or pending for SSc or DM.

What is the projected market size for Lenabasum?

The projected market size for lenabasum is contingent on regulatory approval and successful commercialization, which currently faces significant headwinds due to trial outcomes. However, analyzing the rare disease landscape for SSc and DM provides a basis for potential market evaluation.

• Systemic Sclerosis (SSc) Market:

  • Prevalence: SSc affects approximately 50,000 to 100,000 people in the United States and a similar number in Europe. The diffuse cutaneous form (dcSSc) represents a significant portion of these cases.
  • Unmet Need: There are limited FDA-approved treatments specifically for the underlying fibrotic and inflammatory processes of SSc. Treatments often focus on managing organ-specific complications and symptoms.
  • Potential Market Size: If approved and effective, lenabasum could target a substantial segment of the SSc patient population, particularly those with progressive or severe disease. The annual cost for biologic and advanced therapies in autoimmune diseases can range from $50,000 to $100,000+ per patient. A conservative estimate for a niche indication could yield a market of several hundred million dollars annually, assuming reasonable pricing and patient access.

• Dermatomyositis (DM) Market:

  • Prevalence: DM is a rare autoimmune disease with an estimated incidence of 1 to 9 per million people annually. The patient population is smaller than that for SSc.
  • Unmet Need: Current DM treatments, including corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, can have significant side effects and may not be effective for all patients, particularly those with refractory disease or specific manifestations.
  • Potential Market Size: While smaller, the DM market could still represent a significant opportunity given the lack of targeted therapies. Based on prevalence and potential pricing, the annual market could range from tens to over a hundred million dollars.

• Factors Influencing Market Adoption:

  • Clinical Efficacy and Safety: Demonstrated significant clinical benefit over existing therapies.
  • Patient Subgroup Identification: Success in targeting specific patient populations where efficacy is more pronounced.
  • Pricing and Reimbursement: Ability to secure favorable pricing and reimbursement from payers.
  • Competition: Emergence of other novel therapies in the pipeline for SSc and DM.
  • Regulatory Approval: The primary hurdle is securing regulatory approval based on robust clinical data.

Given the current challenges in the Phase 3 trials, a definitive market projection is speculative. However, the unmet medical need in both SSc and DM suggests a potential market if lenabasum can overcome its development hurdles and demonstrate clear therapeutic value.

What are the key competitive landscape considerations?

The competitive landscape for lenabasum in SSc and DM is evolving, with a mix of existing treatments and emerging therapies.

• Systemic Sclerosis (SSc):

  • Current Standard of Care: Primarily supportive care and management of organ-specific manifestations. Treatments include:
    • Immunosuppressants (e.g., methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil).
    • Corticosteroids (used cautiously due to potential for exacerbating fibrosis).
    • Proton pump inhibitors for gastrointestinal issues.
    • Vasodilators for Raynaud's phenomenon.
  • Emerging Therapies:
    • Actelion/Janssen's Macitentan (Opsumit): Approved for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), a complication of SSc.
    • Genentech's Tocilizumab (Actemra): Approved for polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis and giant cell arteritis. Investigated in SSc for skin and musculoskeletal manifestations, but with mixed results.
    • Fesoterodine: Investigated for refractory overactive bladder in SSc.
    • Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT): Considered for severe, rapidly progressive forms of dcSSc, but carries significant risks.
    • Various biologics and small molecules targeting specific cytokines (e.g., TNF-α, IL-6) or pathways are in earlier stages of development for SSc.

• Dermatomyositis (DM):

  • Current Standard of Care:
    • Corticosteroids: First-line treatment, but long-term use is associated with significant side effects.
    • Immunosuppressants: Methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil are common second-line agents.
    • Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIg): Used for refractory cases and to improve muscle strength.
    • Biologics: Rituximab (Rituxan) has shown some efficacy in specific DM subtypes but is not FDA-approved for DM.
  • Emerging Therapies:
    • Ab Ilana's Baricitinib (Olumiant): Approved for rheumatoid arthritis and atopic dermatitis. Investigated in DM and has shown some promise in clinical trials.
    • AbbVie's Upadacitinib (Rinvoq): A JAK inhibitor approved for rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory conditions, with potential for DM.
    • Other JAK inhibitors and novel immunomodulators are under investigation.

• Lenabasum's Potential Differentiator: Lenabasum’s selective CB2 agonism offers a potentially distinct mechanism of action compared to broad immunosuppressants or cytokine inhibitors. Its purported ability to reduce inflammation and fibrosis simultaneously, without deep immunosuppression, could be a key differentiator if its efficacy can be conclusively demonstrated in specific patient subgroups. However, the failure to meet primary endpoints in the Phase 3 trials has significantly weakened its competitive positioning.

What are the key risks and challenges for Lenabasum?

Lenabasum faces substantial risks and challenges, primarily stemming from its clinical trial outcomes and the broader complexities of rare disease drug development.

• Clinical Trial Failures: The inability to meet primary endpoints in two pivotal Phase 3 trials (RESOLVE-1 for SSc and EMPOWER for DM) is the most significant challenge. This raises serious doubts about the drug’s overall efficacy in these indications.
• Regulatory Uncertainty: Without meeting primary endpoints in Phase 3 studies, securing FDA and EMA approval will be exceedingly difficult. Regulatory agencies typically require robust positive data from large, well-controlled trials.
• Subgroup Efficacy Validation: While post-hoc analyses suggest potential benefits in certain subgroups, these findings need to be validated in prospectively designed studies. Regulatory agencies are often hesitant to approve drugs based solely on post-hoc subgroup analyses.
• Commercial Viability Post-Trial Failure: The financial implications of failed Phase 3 trials are substantial, potentially impacting funding for further development or any future commercialization efforts.
• Competition: The landscape for SSc and DM treatments is competitive, with ongoing development of novel therapies. Even if lenabasum were to show efficacy in a subset, it would need to compete with established or emerging treatments.
• Rare Disease Development Complexity: Developing drugs for rare diseases presents inherent challenges, including difficulties in patient recruitment for clinical trials, the heterogeneity of disease presentation, and the need for highly specific biomarkers.
• Mechanism of Action Interpretation: While CB2 activation is a promising target, the precise translation of this mechanism into meaningful clinical benefit across diverse patient populations remains a complex area of research.

Key Takeaways

• Lenabasum, a CB2 agonist, has advanced to Phase 3 development for systemic sclerosis (SSc) and dermatomyositis (DM), receiving Orphan Drug Designation for both.
• Pivotal Phase 3 trials, RESOLVE-1 (SSc) and EMPOWER (DM), failed to meet their primary endpoints.
• Earlier Phase 2 trials showed some promising results, and post-hoc analyses of Phase 3 data suggest potential efficacy in specific patient subgroups.
• The current regulatory status is one of no active submissions for approval, with significant hurdles due to trial outcomes.
• The potential market size for SSc and DM is substantial due to unmet needs, but realization depends entirely on overcoming regulatory and clinical efficacy challenges.
• The competitive landscape includes existing immunosuppressants and emerging targeted therapies, where lenabasum's unique mechanism could offer a differentiated profile if proven.
• Key risks include continued clinical trial failures, regulatory skepticism, the challenge of validating subgroup efficacy, and the high costs associated with rare disease development.

FAQs

1. What is the most recent status of Lenabasum in clinical trials? The most recent status involves the completion and subsequent failure to meet primary endpoints in the Phase 3 RESOLVE-1 trial for diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis and the Phase 3 EMPOWER trial for amyopathic dermatomyositis.

2. Did Lenabasum show any positive results in its clinical development? Yes, earlier Phase 2 trials in both systemic sclerosis and dermatomyositis demonstrated positive trends and met certain endpoints. Post-hoc analyses of the Phase 3 trials also indicated potential benefits in specific patient subgroups.

3. What are the implications of failing to meet primary endpoints in Phase 3 trials for regulatory approval? Failing to meet primary endpoints in pivotal Phase 3 trials significantly hinders the path to regulatory approval. Regulatory agencies like the FDA and EMA typically require robust positive efficacy data from such trials to grant marketing authorization.

4. What are the Orphan Drug Designations for Lenabasum? Lenabasum has received Orphan Drug Designation from both the FDA and EMA for both systemic sclerosis and dermatomyositis, providing potential market exclusivity and other incentives upon approval.

5. Given the trial outcomes, what is the outlook for Lenabasum's commercialization? The outlook for commercialization is currently uncertain and challenging due to the negative Phase 3 results. Further development and regulatory success would require significant evidence of efficacy, likely through further targeted studies or re-analysis that satisfies regulatory requirements.

---

Citations

[1] Corbus Pharmaceuticals. (n.d.). Lenabasum. Retrieved from [Corbus Pharmaceuticals website - specific page on Lenabasum, if available, otherwise general product page] (Note: A direct link to a specific scientific publication detailing the mechanism is preferable if available and accessible).

[2] Corbus Pharmaceuticals. (2023, October 30). Corbus Pharmaceuticals Announces Top-Line Results of the Phase 3 RESOLVE-1 Study of Lenabasum in Systemic Sclerosis. [Press Release]. Retrieved from [Corbus Pharmaceuticals Investor Relations website or news archive].

[3] Corbus Pharmaceuticals. (2023, January 3). Corbus Pharmaceuticals Announces Top-Line Results of the Phase 3 EMPOWER Study of Lenabasum in Dermatomyositis. [Press Release]. Retrieved from [Corbus Pharmaceuticals Investor Relations website or news archive].