CDK9 inhibitors (ScinnoHub)

Kronos Bio is letting go nearly all its employees after flashing red lights earlier this month. As part of an 83% workforce downsizing, CEO Norbert Bischofberger is heading out the door and handing the keys to recently hired finance and operating chief Deborah Knobelman. The biotech had eliminated a trio of executives in January and conducted a couple of rounds of layoffs this year and last year . The latest round of layoffs will “substantially” wrap up by Dec. 31, the company said. Bischofberger was the fifth employee at Kronos, and he’s been with it since nearly the beginning, having taken part in the startup’s seed round back in 2018 after a three-decade R&D career at Gilead. “Norbert’s steadfast leadership was instrumental in the founding and building of Kronos Bio,” chair Arie Belldegrun said in a release. Bischofberger’s resignation takes effect Dec. 3, and he’ll continue on the board, according to an SEC filing. His decades of expertise will continue elsewhere: He recently joined the board of Vir Biotechnology and is also a scientific advisor to a new VC firm trying to build up the biotech ecosystem in his native Austria. He was also on the board of Morphic until Eli Lilly bought it for $3.2 billion this summer. Kronos said earlier this month it would seek “strategic alternatives” after looking at data for its CDK9 inhibitor. It determined additional development wasn’t warranted. The biotech had inked a $20 million upfront discovery deal with Genentech last year. At the end of September, the biotech had $124.9 million in cash, equivalents and investments, meaning it could be a target for a reverse merger. There were 10 biotech reverse mergers through the first nine months of 2024, according to a William Blair third-quarter report. At least five more have been disclosed since early October. Kronos went public at $19 per share $KRON in a $250 million IPO in October 2020. It trades below $1 today.

Japan’s “paternalistic” health culture may be related to lower satisfaction. Photo: Vitalii Stock/Shutterstock. Japanese patients with chronic conditions including cancer, diabetes and MS are significantly less satisfied with care received, and less confident in managing their own symptoms than peers in countries like the US, Germany and France, a new study suggests. Globaldata’s Patient Empowerment Thematic Intelligence report surveyed over 500 chronic patients across 11 countries on aspects of their care, catalogued by disease and nationality. GlobalData is the parent company of Pharmaceutical Technology . The general trend of the study was that chronic patients predominantly feel empowered to manage and understand their treatment. The Thematic Intelligence Team explains that: “The majority of patients with various chronic conditions agreed or strongly agreed that upon diagnosis they were given enough information about their condition, treatment options, medications, and services by their healthcare provider.” Similarly, around three-quarters of patients studied believe that the data they receive from their health teams is evidence-based, and in all countries but Japan over 70% of patients were happy with the amount and quality of information received about their condition. In Japan, the number only reaches 60%. See Also: Kronos Bio gets grant for CDK9 inhibitors for modulating kinase activity in patients Nocion secures Series B funds to develop cough treatment Japan’s outlier status remains visible in more detailed breakdowns of patient empowerment metrics, scoring lowest on polling around informed decision-making, feeling respected by healthcare providers and confidence in managing signs and symptoms of their condition. In many cases, the discrepancies are large, as in the case of symptom management in which its 42% agreement is over 20 points below its next closest comparator, Canada. This mixture of dissatisfaction and lack of confidence may be explained by culture, the study suggests: “Japanese patients may still have fewer opportunities to participate in medical decision making as a result of the traditional paternalism of Japanese physicians, where HCP decisions are unquestionable and accepted by the patients.” Whatever the reason, close scrutiny of the matter is necessary to ensure standards of care remain high.