Close

GSK and Alector to develop antibodies for neurodegenerative diseases

Note* - All images used are for editorial and illustrative purposes only and may not originate from the original news provider or associated company.

Related stories

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

Identifying Sex Specific Outcomes Through Real-World Data Analysis

The pharmaceutical sector is increasingly turning to large-scale datasets...
- Advertisement -

GlaxoSmithKline plc and Alector announced a strategic global collaboration for the development and commercialisation of two clinical-stage, potential first-in-class monoclonal antibodies (AL001 and AL101) designed to elevate progranulin (PGRN) levels. PGRN is a key regulator of immune activity in the brain with genetic links to multiple neurodegenerative disorders, making it one of the most attractive genetically validated targets for the development of new immuno-neurology treatments.

The collaboration brings together Alector’s leading immuno-neurology expertise with GSK’s R&D focus on the science of the immune system and human genetics, proven late-stage drug development capabilities and global footprint. Enrolment is currently underway for a pivotal Phase 3 trial for AL001 in people at risk for or with frontotemporal dementia due to a progranulin gene mutation (FTD-GRN). FTD-GRN is a rapidly progressing and severe form of dementia found most frequently in people less than 65 years old at the time of diagnosis and has no approved treatments. AL001 is also currently in a Phase 2 study in symptomatic FTD patients with a mutation in the C9orf72 gene and is planned to enter Phase 2 development for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in the second half of 2021. AL101 is in a Phase 1a clinical trial and is designed to treat patients suffering from more prevalent neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease.

Dr Hal Barron, Chief Scientific Officer and President R&D, GSK, said: “Our focus on human genetics and the science of the immune system gives us unique insights into the potential of targets such as progranulin to help patients with a number of neurodegenerative diseases. Working with Alector’s world class scientists will allow us to investigate the potential of these immuno-neurology therapies to help patients with frontotemporal dementia, a devastating disease without any currently approved treatments, as well as explore the ability to help patients with other neurodegenerative diseases, such as ALS, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.”

Arnon Rosenthal, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer, Alector, said: “This transformative collaboration brings together Alector’s leading immuno-neurology expertise with GSK’s commitment to immunology and human genetics, proven drug development capabilities and global footprint, to help expand and accelerate the development of our progranulin franchise into large indications, while bolstering the build out of our own late-stage development and commercial capabilities. Importantly, this collaboration is designed to fully support AL001 and AL101’s development and to enable Alector to continue building a fully integrated company as we strive to address the high unmet medical need in patients suffering from neurodegenerative diseases. We are confident that GSK’s extensive experience launching ground-breaking medicines at the intersection of immunology and human genetics, will ensure that AL001 and AL101 are developed to their full potential.”

As part of the recent Investor Update day on 23 June 2021, GSK committed to an R&D approach focused on maximising opportunities by leveraging an increased understanding of the science of the immune system and human genetics. The collaboration with Alector on AL001 and AL101, two antibodies designed to elevate PGRN levels and potentially slow the progression of FTD and other neurological disorders, provides GSK access to a promising clinical programme in immuno-neurology.

Terms of the Collaboration
Under the terms of the collaboration agreement, Alector will receive $700 million in upfront payments. In addition, Alector will be eligible to receive up to an additional $1.5 billion in clinical development, regulatory and commercial launch-related milestone payments.

Alector will lead the global clinical development of AL001 and AL101 through Phase 2 proof-of-concept. Thereafter, Alector and GSK will share development responsibilities for all late-stage clinical studies for AL001 and AL101 and all costs for global development will be divided between the two companies.

The companies will be jointly responsible for commercialisation in the U.S. and will share profits and losses. Alector will lead commercial efforts associated with AL001 in orphan indications and GSK will lead the commercialisation of AL101 in Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. Outside the U.S., GSK will be responsible for commercialisation of AL001 and AL101 and Alector will be eligible for tiered royalties.

The collaboration agreement is conditional upon customary conditions including review by the appropriate regulatory agencies under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act.

About the Progranulin-Elevating Monoclonal Antibodies – AL001 and AL101
Decreased levels of PGRN, a key regulator of immune response, lysosomal function, and neuronal survival in the brain, are genetically linked to many neurodegenerative disorders. AL001 and AL101 are novel human monoclonal antibodies that elevate levels of progranulin by blocking the sortilin receptor responsible for progranulin degradation. AL001 is currently in a pivotal Phase 3 clinical study in people at risk for or with frontotemporal dementia due to a progranulin gene mutation (FTD-GRN). AL001 is also currently in a Phase 2 study in symptomatic FTD patients with a C9orf72 mutation, with another Phase 2 study in patients with ALS planned to begin in the second half of 2021. AL101, is designed to treat people suffering from more prevalent neurodegenerative diseases and is currently in a Phase 1a study in healthy volunteers. AL101 is intended to be developed for treatment of Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease.

About Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD)
Frontotemporal dementia is a rapidly progressing and severe form of dementia. It affects 50,000 to 60,000 people in the United States and roughly 110,000 in the European Union, with potentially higher prevalence in Asia and Latin America. There are currently no FDA-approved treatment options for FTD.

There are multiple heritable forms of FTD. In one form, FTD-GRN, people have a mutation in the progranulin gene. This population represents 5% to 10% of all people with FTD. Mutations in a single copy of a progranulin gene leads to a 50% or greater decrease in the level of progranulin protein and invariably leads to development of FTD. In another form, people with mutations in the chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9orf72) gene can develop FTD. FTD-C9orf72 is associated with abnormal accumulation of the protein TDP-43, which is also a hallmark in FTD-GRN. To date researchers have identified more than 120 inherited loss of function mutations in the progranulin gene that lead to FTD.

Alector Conference Call Information
Alector management will host a conference call to discuss the collaboration today at 8:30 a.m. ET. Analysts and investors are invited to participate in the conference call by dialling (888) 705-0365 from the U.S. and Canada or (415) 817-9241 internationally and using the conference ID 9476664. The live webcast can be accessed on the investor page of Alector’s website at investors.alector.com. A replay of the webcast will be available on Alector’s website approximately two hours after the completion of the event and will be archived for up to 30 days.

About Alector
Alector is a clinical stage biotechnology company pioneering immuno-neurology, a novel therapeutic approach for the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases. The Company is developing a broad portfolio of innate immune system programs, designed to functionally repair genetic mutations that cause dysfunction of the brain’s immune system and enable the rejuvenated immune cells to counteract emerging brain pathologies. Immuno-neurology targets immune dysfunction as a root cause of multiple pathologies that are drivers of degenerative brain disorders. The Company’s immuno-neurology product candidates are supported by biomarkers and target genetically defined patient populations in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. This scientific approach is also the basis for the Company’s immuno-oncology programs. Alector is headquartered in South San Francisco, California.

 

Never miss a pharmaceutical headline

The pharmaceutical industry moves fast – stay on top of it with our must - read briefings.

  • The top pharma and life sciences stories, straight to your inbox
  • The biggest news, features, interviews, and analysis
  • Dedicated coverage of the key developments driving the global pharmaceutical sector

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access the Media Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Latest stories

Related stories

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

Identifying Sex Specific Outcomes Through Real-World Data Analysis

The pharmaceutical sector is increasingly turning to large-scale datasets...

Strengthening Clinical Evidence Through Female Cohort Representation

The pharmaceutical industry is undergoing a fundamental shift in...

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access theMedia Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Translate »