Enanta Pharmaceuticals Inc (ENTA)

[willyw]

More "the flight you booked is going to crash" posts?
Classic. : )

Such a bloodbath.
We are down 41 cents, 80 minutes to go in the day
and we aren't even at half average daily volume yet.

I bought a little more yesterday.

[Jake2234]

$33.70 and falling. Look out below.

[vinmantoo]

willyw,

Just to add to your cemmentary, the Pardes drug wasn't very good and pales in comparison to EDP-235. See slide 26 of ENTA's presentation.

Some data comparisons.
Vero cell IC50
EDP235 is 68x more potent than the Pardes drug

Vero cell IC90
EDP235 is 54x more potent than the Pardes drug

https://ir.enanta.com/static-files/0b9a9564-339c-4501-8c98-eab636846bf4

An even bigger sidebar is that lack progress in HBV doesn't concern me that much either. They have a potent HBV antiviral (EDP-514) and the competition is also moving very slowly. They could still have a future valuable asset or partnership. I would not characterize it as dead.

While I am disappointed that ENTA hasn't announced another anti-HBV candidate. HBV is a tough nut to crack and better treatments are desperately needed. EDP-514 showed some impressive results so theoretically it is possible for ENTA to pair it with a nuc as a possible treatment. However, ENTA wants a third candidates to push for a functional cure like they were able to achieve with HCV. Patience is a virtue. ENTA isn't a big pharma and has limited money and personnel. With the $200 million coming from the deal for half of their HepC royalties, money is far less of a problem.

[willyw]

I'm not following you.
I see different things, of course.
Easily over 12-16 months ago in one of Pardes pitches they showed a graph of viral decline in days; the dosed and the control group. They demonstrated that the viral decline was identical in both groups. If you superimposed the two viral declines over days it would pretty much look like one line.

Here's what Pardes said in the link you provided;
“We continue to believe in the need for new oral antivirals for COVID-19 (my emphasis~W), and the importance of continued investment in next generation therapeutics that will be needed to help prevent the next pandemic. However, these unexpected results have forced us to make the difficult decision to suspend further development of pomotrelvir and pursue alternative strategic opportunities for the company,”

also
"Pomotrelvir did not demonstrate meaningful improvement over placebo in reduction from baseline(my emphasis~W) of SARS-CoV-2 infectious virus titer by IVA or in the reduction from baseline or proportion achieving undetectable viral load (RNA) by quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) measured from mid-turbinate swabs".

The short answer is that Pardes created a weak ineffective protease inhibitor that created the same viral decline as placebo.
Pardes seems to think that a better antiviral is possible and needed. I can agree with that.

In a matter of a few weeks we will see the efficacy of Enanta's covid candidate. I have little doubt that it will top Pardes, Pfizer, I believe based on the animal studies it may be more potent than the Shionogi candidate and have a reduced pill burden and will be more safe.

For me a 5 day course of treatment that eliminates the virus could have dramatic differences from those that almost eliminate the virus.
We will soon see.

RE; RSV. They did the challenge study due to the absence of available sick patients. RSV has returned and the trials will provide proof of safety and efficacy or it's lack.

Let's imagine that ENTA RSV compound isn't the final result; the very best iteration of a RSV antiviral.
Well, that may make them like Pfizer's Paxlovid. If it's the first, if it's the only that may be sufficient for an approval with few or no competitors in the antiviral market.
Thanks for the heads up on the acquired Pfizer RSV candidate. I'm not up to speed on that. Frankly I'm focused more on the covid program than RSV at the moment.

An even bigger sidebar is that lack progress in HBV doesn't concern me that much either. They have a potent HBV antiviral (EDP-514) and the competition is also moving very slowly. They could still have a future valuable asset or partnership. I would not characterize it as dead. (see commentary below).

A final thing; these are *trials*. That's stating the obvious. No one knows until the trial is over. We may have hopes or opinions but it's the nature of trials to expose the reality. To know or to attempt to assert that one knows is kind of a fools errand.
That doesn't mean it isn't fun to try to guess outcomes or sift thru data. I find it more interesting than sports, but I never purport to know who is going to win.

[Jake2234]

Happy to post the data:

https://ir.pardesbio.com/news-releases/news-release-details/pardes-biosciences-announces-top-line-results-phase-2-trial

To simplify for you, look at the “p values”. For the drug to work (in this real world setting that some folks here seem to forget is the only important thing), the p value needs to be below 0.05.

For rsv, please remember that they ran a challenge study which showed stat sig antiviral effects. Want to stress that this is a highly controlled setting. Dosing began right after innoculation, and it was the same for every participant. The lesson with the failure of RSVP contrasted against the challenge study is that it is nearly impossible to catch these people in time, and do so with uniformity, to achieve p less than 0.05.
For babies, elderly, and immunosuppressed, yes, could give better p value. But Enrollment is clearly very slow. Don’t forget, Pfizer acquired Reviral and all of their small molecule RSV assets. It’s another big risk for their RSV program.

[vinmantoo]

And who said that the RSV trial was a failure? Not I.
You are concluding it was a failure simply because the "healthies" recovered at a rate similar to those administered ENTA's RSV drug. You seem to conclude then that *therefore* it cannot work on other groups of immuno compromised/suppressed groups (young, old, immuno compromised)

As far as RSV, EDP-938 showed good efficacy in the phase 2 trial in healthy adults with regards stop reducing viral load and had a good safety profile. However, RSV resolved quickly even in placebo, which was not unexpected. The trial in immunocompromised patients and the very young are the acid test. Keep in mind that a second anti-RSV drug, EDP-323, has gotten fast track status so may be used alone of in a combo with EDP-938 down the road. Still a lot of questions to be addressed but clearly not a failure.

[vinmantoo]

For me the up front money secured by Mavyret agreement means that there is no money bottleneck. It puts ENTA in a stronger bargaining position if there were to be a partner. You don't want to be in a position where you are desperate to deal. (that's my opinion)

Exactly. The reason why ENTA didn't get a better royalty deal from ABBV with their HepC drugs is they were in a position of weakness. This financial deal means ENTA is now in a position of strength and they don't desperately need a deal. Obviously it all depends on the data from the EDP-235 phase 2 trial, where likely the safety data is the biggest potential worry. ENTA could theoretically fund their own phase 3 trial alone but I am sure they would rather partner rather than take the full risk themselves. I can see from you posts your were response to Jake, but that guy claimed the FDA would never allow anyone to run a phase 3 trial, which is nonsense. However, it is telling he now he now says ENTA will do it alone so I guess he "thinks" the FDA changed its mind. Of course the financial deal ENTA made give them freedom and some leeway.

The world needs better anti-Covid drugs than Paxlovid as Covid will be around a long time. Obviously, the resident board "expert" Jake does not agree as foolishly stated that Advil would show non-inferiority to Paxlovid. I must admit I added a bit more today at $34.75. The NASDAQ was down 2% as McCarthy threatens to crash the economy.

[willyw]

Thanks. I am just a layman with an interest and no credentials.
So my opinion, my hope, my whistling past the graveyard posts are no promise I'm right. Many here are way sharper than I.

RE: The Pardes data. I'm not sure I follow, but posting a link to the data would have made it more certain we were on the same page.
I'm no expert but in a trial with placebo I'm unsure you can compare that placebo arm to other trials or would want to. Further unsure what it would prove. Certainly there are more folks with antibodies (both vaccine and natural infection and both) now that when this started but I don't think that precludes being able to run trials that differentiate or show non-inferiority.
Somehow I think there are others or other pharmas that would agree. Unsure I'm following you- probably not.
I agree that it isn't 2021 anymore. That's germane, but it doesn't mean that compounds cannot be evaluated for safety and efficacy and compared to others like Paxlovid.

Now, it’s highly concerning that going into a top line (within 4 weeks!), they announce a “non-dilutive” fundraising event. Remember when they announced a new high risk RSV trial right before announcing a failed result on RSVP? (bold my emphasis ~W) Let’s please not forget this.

I think the day was coming for a number of reasons; burn rate due to a number of compounds, diminished HCV income due to covid, difficulty in running trials due to covid. Unlike you I think of it as a good thing, a wise thing. The presumption is if covid or other endeavors are sound it will be a good investment. If failure is all there is on the menu even then it may still be the correct choice. Obviously, I am optimistic about their chances.

Now..... As Ronald Reagan said; "There you go again". : )
And who said that the RSV trial was a failure? Not I.
You are concluding it was a failure simply because the "healthies" recovered at a rate similar to those administered ENTA's RSV drug. You seem to conclude then that *therefore* it cannot work on other groups of immuno compromised/suppressed groups (young, old, immuno compromised)
That is pretty similar to proposing that since most people recover from covid that no drug is needed since most healthies don't die and recover. The evidence though is Paxlovid prevented hospitalizations and deaths- just far less so in younger healthier people.

A sidebar is to this layman Paxlovid may simply be weak, a too high pill burden, inconvenient and with drug interactions. If it was a little stronger or was dosed longer there might be more defined results, fewer rebounds. I think the Shionogi may perform better (while remaining problematic). If the Enanta compound if more efficacious the results could be far more differentiated and could be used in prophylaxis or long covid. But I repeat myself.

Please keep in mind about 1 in 300 Americans died of covid; 1.11 million out of about 330 million. Every time I post that number it seems impossible. I cannot believe I have it right and keep looking at the 1.11 million dead against our population (332 million in 2021) and think I've made some grade school error and my decimal points are off a few places.Am I tripping? : )

There will be groups of people with Covid and with RSV who will need/benefit from an antiviral, IMHO. That's my bet, my opinion. We will see what the data brings us.
Believe me, I am certain of nothing.

[JK2016]

I think I speak for more than just myself regarding your unhinged thoughts and insights regarding the matters at hand but if you haven’t figured out by now you have close to if not less than zero credibility on this board so unless you’re here looking for genuine discussion and sense based analysis rather than a poorly labeled smear campaign perhaps a board more suited to your attention grabbing needs would be more suitable.

[Jake2234]

Thanks for the reply, Willy. It’s great discussion.

On the clinical landscape, I would refer you to the Pardes dataset. Review the placebo arm. How will EDP-235 beat the SPRINT placebo arm? It’s not an foregone conclusion, but I do not believe it will. The world population has high seropositivity to Omicron. As far as continued death rate, these people will never be treated with 235 in a clinical trial. If they enroll HR pts during a phase 3, this will take a long time as there is a potential life saving therapy available to most (Pax). Maybe they can enroll HR folks who are on statins? Most docs would pull the patients off the statin. My thesis on 235 is simply born out of the Pardes -real- placebo dataset. Facts there we can’t ignore. It’s just not 2021 anymore.

Now, it’s highly concerning that going into a top line (within 4 weeks!), they announce a “non-dilutive” fundraising event. Remember when they announced a new high risk RSV trial right before announcing a failed result on RSVP? Let’s please not forget this. Smells familiar… I applaud the c suite for this tactful play, but to me it spells uncertainty for them to secure a deal. If they had someone interested, they would already have the deal in place. Selling the royalty stream now does nothing whatsoever to puff their feathers and exert independence to a potential partner. There is no way in hell that results are still blinded if they truly have a May topline. The GC’s recent buy goes counter to this thesis, but I still can’t get a sense of what his total holdings are.

One good point you make is future variants. This is a guaranteed thing for me. Think past Omicron … SARS-3! It will definitely happen and I hope they are around to catch these patients, and differentiate vs pbo.

[willyw]

Thanks, Vin!
I greatly appreciate your response and the value of this board and members.
So I greatly value this board and it's many members.
I've learned a lot- and some of it has nothing to do with investing.

If the Enanta data and FDA response is what I want, I'm sure I will go in deeper.
We've sure waited long enough. I'm hoping for the best.

[willyw]

I have no crystal ball. I have to wait for results.
I do feel I have some cause to see success in efficacy and safety.

Hope you are right but I feel the clinical landscape has changed wrt endpoints.

That's one of my criticisms; You get an award for going from point A to a conclusion with seemingly no proof, very little support of your claims. You could be right but you seem to refuse to cite anything, show your work. You would have a better respected opinion (cause that seems like that's all you are offering) if could somehow explain or substantiate your claims.

Also, this ‘mortgage’ today means - no deal is in the works. They will go solo into phase 3.

Once again, an unsubstantiated opinion, but expressed as certainty.

For me the up front money secured by Mavyret agreement means that there is no money bottleneck. It puts ENTA in a stronger bargaining position if there were to be a partner. You don't want to be in a position where you are desperate to deal. (that's my opinion)

If we are talking about trading HCV sales (of which Enanta got a smallish sliver of annual sales) and trading them for owning a best in class covid drug I think it's a sound call.
Let me flip that script on you.
The fact they are borrowing against HCV profits shows a commitment to go forward.
If I were a potential partner I'd want to know the safety and efficacy and FDA stance on trials and approval. IF results are still blinded I'd be curious how one would make a deal, not knowing the strength of the hand.
You just seem to only see failure. I see potential improvements over Paxlovid, easier prescriptions, fewer rebounds, possible new labels for treatment.
I foresee that they want protect against other future potential deadly variants, but perhaps I'm wrong.
We won't have long to wait.

Much depends on the safety and efficacy, the phase 3 design and the path of covid.

In the USA we are at 1.11 million deaths divided by 333 million population (I'm fudging numbers to make the math more obvious- the CDC says 1,129,573 deaths) We are a small percentage of the world population and we comprised 1/6th of the fatalities. 1160 people per week are currently dying in the USA per the CDC. Death is NOT the only metric one should look at. (current US hospitalizations 7,540 per CDC). Long covid, medical debt, medical bankruptcies, lost production, supply line shortages; it goes on and on.
I don't see the need for a better treatment diminishing.

But that's just me

[vinmantoo]

I am crossing fingers for you and have considered going back to the well myself. I can almost see the runway from here.
Landings are always the hardest part. : )

Thanks willyw. Good luck to you if you decide to wet your beak a bit.

It's always good to get feedback- both constructive positive and negative.

Very true but the feedback needs to be based on reality, not sheer nonsense like Jake spews. Two examples of these are his assertion that companies won't be able to run phase 3 trials of anti-Covid drugs and that Advil would show non-inferiority to Paxlovid. Anyone who spend that kind of nonsense can safely be ignored.

[Jake2234]

Thanks Willy for the leveled response, much appreciated!

Hope you are right but I feel the clinical landscape has changed wrt endpoints.

Also, this ‘mortgage’ today means - no deal is in the works. They will go solo into phase 3. Good luck.

[rwwine]

“Very true, but I have been doing the opposite, slowly buying not just ENTA but several stocks including RVNC, ABBV and GILD”.

I like this approach myself. Added to my RVNC position today as well. I have to work 7 more years and have no qualms about adding to my core holdings on days where others decide to exit. Cheers.

[willyw]

I am crossing fingers for you and have considered going back to the well myself.

I can almost see the runway from here.
Landings are always the hardest part. : )

It's always good to get feedback- both constructive positive and negative.

[vinmantoo]

Many have gone to cash in this period of uncertainty- that is not a referendum on Enanta's covid program per se.

Very true, but I have been doing the opposite, slowly buying not just ENTA but several stocks including RVNC, ABBV and GILD.

[vinmantoo]

This was a smart and prudent move by ENTA. That should be obvious to anyone with a functional brain, which leaves out our friend Jake. ENTA was going to have to raise cash in a year or so, and with big rise in interest rates over the last year, if they didn't do this they were facing either dilutive financing or a loan on less favorable terms than in a long while. No worries about cash for a while now. All attention shifts to the phase 2 trial data which is due on a few weeks. While ENTA investors hope for, or expect the data to be very good, there is no guarantees. That is why this deal for ~54% of future MAVYRET revenues and placing a cap on revenues sold, were a smart prudent move. By keeping half of the revenues, ENTA will still benefit in MAVYRET revenues rise post-Covid.

[willyw]

Thank you. ; )
I have come to rather enjoy your "the flight you booked is going to crash" type posts.
I've no idea why you are fixated on Enanta; I wager you are just trying to be helpful. : )

For those investing there is always that school of thought that one should jump out of the plane before it crashes. I take a slightly different view; stocks go up and down independent of any apparent reason. For instance, money sometimes rotates in or out of a stock and then (for instance when a drug is de-risked), then money might move back in. Many have gone to cash in this period of uncertainty- that is not a referendum on Enanta's covid program per se.

IMHO people are waiting for results of Enanta's covid drug which could arrive in mere weeks.
Any selling hasn't been at concerning volume (once again my opinion).

Pfizer's sales of Paxlovid reached $18.9 billion in 2022.
Pfizer expects that revenue to drop 58% to $8 billion in 2023.
I expect that in mere weeks Enanta's EDP- 235 covid drug will be shown to be more effective than Paxlovid, be once a day dosing and non-boosted- thus making it safe for large groups without worrisome drug interactions.
IF it is your contention that covid is over, then Enanta's drug could be best in class in a niche where further covid drug development is scuttled.
This is very much like the HCV market today, right?

It may also be that the drug could show promise in long covid or prophylaxis, or save more live in high risk groups. If it is more efficacious it could reduce or eliminate rebounds.

I'm content to wait for results. I could be wrong, but I'm not about to jump out of the plane right before it lands based on your analytical skills.

One thing I am reasonably certain of;
If Enanta's results show that it is more efficacious than Paxlovid, is indeed once a day dosing
you will probably still opine that it can't work, and will fail.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=170538068

I've been wrong before, and I allow I may be this time too. : )
My view is that if you look at drug effects on heathies that presumably will recover regardless you are almost deliberately trying to avoid looking at groups where results will be more highly differentiated. This is true in Covid and I think may also be shown in RSV.

We will see.

[rwwine]

Snagged 1,000 shares. Too cheap to pass on.

[Jake2234]

Running out of $. Need to keep that cash burning fire bright!

[DewDiligence]

ENTA’s partial monetization of the Mavyret royalty stream is a wise move (IMO), although they probably should have done it sooner. I commented on this in #msg-166883690.

[rwwine]

Enanta Pharmaceuticals Announces Sale of a Portion of Global Royalties on MAVYRET® (U.S.)/MAVIRET® (ex-U.S.) (Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir) to OMERS Life Sciences for $200 Million
Non-Dilutive and Strengthens Balance Sheet

Competitive Process Results in the Sale of 54.5% of the MAVYRET®/MAVIRET® Royalty Interest, Subject to a 1.42x Cap
Sale Proceeds to Fund Continuing Clinical Development Across Virology Pipeline
April 25, 2023, 8:01 AM EDT
WATERTOWN, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: ENTA), a clinical-stage biotechnology company dedicated to creating small molecule drugs for viral infections, today announced the sale to OMERS, one of Canada’s largest defined benefit pension plans, of 54.5% of Enanta’s future royalty payments from AbbVie Inc. on worldwide sales of MAVYRET®/MAVIRET®. The purchase price paid to Enanta was $200 million. OMERS right to receive royalty payments is based on net sales of the product beginning in July 2023 through June 2032, with total payments capped at 1.42 times the purchase price. Enanta retains 45.5% of all royalties until the cap is hit, at which point 100% of all further royalties revert to Enanta.
“We are pleased to partner with OMERS and its Life Sciences team to secure additional non-dilutive funding, which not only provides us with increased financial flexibility and retained economics, but also demonstrates the continued value of MAVYRET®/MAVIRET® and its significance for patients who continue to benefit from this therapy,” said Jay R. Luly, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of Enanta Pharmaceuticals. “As we execute on our programs, these funds enable us to continue to advance our robust pipeline of treatments for life-threatening viruses.”
“Enanta is a leader in small molecule drug discovery as evidenced by the successful development and commercialization of MAVYRET®/MAVIRET® in collaboration with AbbVie,” said Rob Missere, Managing Director & Head of OMERS Life Sciences. “We are pleased to invest in future sales of MAVYRET®/MAVIRET®, an important cure for chronic hepatitis C virus infection. This deal furthers our mandate to deliver an attractive source of long-term returns for our more than 560,000 members.”
MAVYRET®/MAVIRET® is a fixed-dose combination of glecaprevir, an NS3/4A protease inhibitor, and pibrentasvir, an NS5A inhibitor, indicated for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Glecaprevir was discovered by Enanta under a collaboration between AbbVie and Enanta to discover and develop protease inhibitor treatments for chronic HCV infection. MAVYRET®/MAVIRET® was launched globally beginning in 2017.

[vinmantoo]

Vin, sorry, I was addressing the guy who was criticising your post without giving his reasons for doing so. Apologise for the ambiguity.

Fritz, no need to apologize. You weren't ambiguous. I clicked on your post and saw you were responding to that Jake persons. I was just warning you about what he is. Check out the nonsense he has posted here before. Notice this is the only broad he has ever posted on. That tells you something. He is also desperate for attention. It makes me laugh, at him.

[Jake2234]

So if you look at the details of this auto-generated list from Yahoo, you will see they include RSU grants and sell to cover transactions.

But back to the point, the GC’s transaction is interesting. I am still wondering how this one transaction fits into his overall portfolio.. this is the important detail.

[Fred Kadiddlehopper]

Vin, sorry, I was addressing the guy who was criticising your post without giving his reasons for doing so. Apologise for the ambiguity.
Best,
-Fritz

[vinmantoo]

Please explain your thinking.

Fred, I just provided a link to insider transactions and the link states under insider purchases over the last 6 months were a net gain of 389,000. I stopped reading what Jake writes as the guy has a bug up his butt about ENTA. No matter what you post he says you are wrong then criticizes you, ENTA and or EDP-235. He doesn't provide facts, just his very negative sometime absurd views. Two of the most laughable things he said is that you can't run a phase 3 trial using anti-Covid drugs and that Advil would show non-inferiority to Paxlovid in treating Covid.

My reaction to Jake is best expressed by old Arabic saying, "the dogs bark, but the caravan moves on".

[Jake2234]

Sure. 400K net shares have not been purchased by insiders in equivalent open market buys.

[Fred Kadiddlehopper]

Please explain your thinking.

[Jake2234]

Your analysis, vinman, is misleading.

[vinmantoo]

ENTA’s GC exercised and held $250K of stock on 4/18/23:

If people want to use tea leaves to divine the future, in the last 6 months insiders have added close to 400K net shares. I prefer data but given the drop in ENTA share price over the recent past I will take anything that smells of a positive.

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/ENTA/insider-transactions?p=ENTA

[Jake2234]

Roy, could you also put this purchase in the broader context of all of his total holdings? Is it a drip or a splash?

[vinmantoo]

All told, the transaction should be construed as bullish. If the options holder did not confidently expect an increase in the share price, there would be no incentive to exercise the options early and pay the immediate tax liability.

Dew, it does sound bullish to me. However, what would really bullish is excellent anti-viral effects of EDP-235 in the phase 2 trial with minimal safety issues. I would also like to see some news that the HepB program using EDP-514 in with a new in house compound or an outside one being used in combination with EDP-514 and a nuc inhibitor. It has been a while since we heard anything in that area.

[Jake2234]

Thanks. So he probably saw the low share price and knew he only had to pay 20K tax for the instant gain, and then any future gain could be included as a long term capital gain, assuming hold for 12 mo?

[DewDiligence]

The overall cash outlay was roughly $220K: $200K (6667 x $30) to exercise the options and about $20K for the immediate (federal + state) tax liability.

[Jake2234]

Agreed. But specifically, how much cash did he just put in? To cover the shares and to cover the tax?

[DewDiligence]

Exercising the options starts the one-year clock for long-term tax treatment of potential capital gains on the exercised shares. The market price on the exercise date becomes the cost basis for the shares resulting from the exercise.

The (unrealized) gain from the difference between the market price on the exercise date and the exercise price of the options is generally taxed immediately as ordinary income. Insiders often pay for this immediate tax liability by forfeiting some shares resulting from the exercise; however, as I noted in this thread Nathaniel Gardiner did not forfeit any shares, so we know he paid the immediate tax liability with cash.

All told, the transaction should be construed as bullish. If the options holder did not confidently expect an increase in the share price, there would be no incentive to exercise the options early and pay the immediate tax liability.

[Jake2234]

Can you provide more detail into the economics of his transaction?

[DewDiligence]

ENTA’s GC exercised and held $250K of stock on 4/18/23:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1177648/000106299323009374/xslF345X04/form4.xml

Nathaniel Gardiner (ENTA’s GC) paid for the tax due on exercising with cash rather than by forfeiting shares.

The options in question did not expire until 2026.

[vinmantoo]

Results from ENTA's phase 2 trial of EDP-235 are due sometime in May. Hopefully we will see some impressive anti-viral activity that will drive a deal in the near future.

[Jake2234]

Still scooping up ‘discount’ shares?

[Jake2234]

This ‘news’ release is a complete pump job.

EDP-305
EDP-721
EDP-514
EDP-938

Don’t forget them. Gone…

[vinmantoo]

More preclinical data on EDP-235, EDP-323 @ECCMID:

Thanks Dew for the heads up. The preclinical data certainly shows EDP-235 has the properties to make it the best in class anti-Covid drug.

To determine the in vivo drug distribution into target tissues, including potential COVID-19 reservoirs: lung, heart, salivary glands, kidney, adipose tissue and lung alveolar macrophages, rats were dosed orally with 25 mg/kg of EDP-235 or nirmatrelvir and plasma and tissue drug levels were analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. The ratios of intracellular to extracellular concentrations of EDP-235 in salivary gland epithelial cells, adipocytes, and macrophages were 11.3, 33.6 and 30.5, respectively, compared to ratios ranged from 0.6 to 1.2 for nirmatrelvir in these human cells. Consistent with the in vitro observations, EDP-235 showed excellent target tissue exposure with tissue-to-plasma ratios of 6.5 in salivary glands, 23.0 in adipose tissues, and 28.4 in lung alveolar macrophages, whereas nirmatrelvir had corresponding values of 0.8, 0.6, and 0.5. These preclinical data demonstrate that EDP-235 achieved preferential target tissue distribution and cell penetration, enabling EDP-235 to target viral reservoirs and minimize viral persistence, which are important factors potentially related to some cases of long COVID-19.

We just need the phase 2 data to show a good safety profile and ENTA and its EDP-235 drug will have a really good chance for success, although that will take more time. I believe the phase 2 data is due by the end of May. A partnership announcement sooner rather than later would go a long way to making me feel more confident.

[DewDiligence]

More preclinical data on EDP-235, EDP-323 @ECCMID:

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230417005226/en

[Jake2234]

6 year low. Don’t think so.

[vinmantoo]

Looks like Biden's announcement that the government is ending the Covid emergency on May 11 might spooked some people. Sadly, Covid will be here a long time so there will be a continuing need for anti-Covid drugs, which hopefully will include EDP-235.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/10/politics/covid-19-national-emergency-end-biden/index.html

[Jake2234]

Big block sold. What’s going on there? Hmmm

[vinmantoo]

ENTA's anti-RSV drugs EDP-323 gets fast track designation. The tortoise that is ENTA continues its painfully slow march towards success and profit for investors.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/enanta-pharmaceuticals-receives-fda-fast-110000666.html

[vinmantoo]

Let's review. Jake wrote this asinine comment.

I could find some advil in my medicine cabinet that would also not show inferiority to Paxlovid in today’s world.

I asked him why don't you address your asinine comment? What is the mechanism of action for Advil and how does inhibit Covid?

Jake responded with the following meaningless comment.

Sure. It’s called seropositivity.

Of course that is nonsense. People who have been infected with Covid can get infected multiple times. They benefit from vaccine booster shots. They benefit from Paxlovid. Advil is useless, just like Jake's comments.

Jake said phase 3 trials couldn't happen mocked the idea that phase 3 trials could happen with anti-Covid drugs. However, Gilead is running phase 3 studies on their Remdesivir derivative. Once again, Jake's comments are useless and he doesn't seem to know much about clinical trials.

Trying to deal with Jake is useless. I am done with him.

[Jake2234]

Sure. It’s called seropositivity.