Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
It is still curious that only two locations account for more than 50% of prescriptions.
Capt, it looks like 49320 of the 95084 have been included in a large batch coming from Marsh Medical Practice. Doing a google maps search, it looks like a health center in a sparsely populated area on the outskirts of any urban core. I find it at least curious that over 50% of Vazkepa prescriptions in the UK come from such a site. What are your thoughts on this?
I have also checked previous months:
- May: 40080 (50%)
- April: 38040 (57%)
- March: 48360 (67%)
- February: 39840 (70%)
- January: 32640 (69%)
So, most prescriptions in the UK come from a small health center? I'm sure the practitioners are also shareholders :D
Also, I have seen that the database includes an identifier of prescribing centers. It might be interesting to include a new graph representing the growth of Vazkepa prescribing centers month by month, as a further indication of growth. To do so, it would be sufficient to apply a 'UNIQUE' to this variable and count the resulting codes. This is just a suggestion, the value of your data on the board is very high and I thank you for doing it voluntarily. Thank you.
Hello, I see the same numbers as situ commented.
Anyway, it looks like 49320 of the 95084 have been included in a large batch coming from Marsh Medical Practice. Doing a google maps search, it looks like a health center in a sparsely populated area on the outskirts of any urban core. I find it at least curious that over 50% of Vazkepa prescriptions in the UK come from such a site. What are your thoughts on this?
I have also checked previous months:
- May: 40080 (50%)
- April: 38040 (57%)
- March: 48360 (67%)
- February: 39840 (70%)
- January: 32640 (69%)
So, most prescriptions in the UK come from a small health center? I'm sure the practitioners are also shareholders :D
Also, I have seen that the database includes an identifier of prescribing centers. It might be interesting to include a new graph representing the growth of Vazkepa prescribing centers month by month, as a further indication of growth. To do so, it would be sufficient to apply a 'UNIQUE' to this variable and count the resulting codes. This is just a suggestion, the value of your data on the board is very high and I thank you for doing it voluntarily. Thank you.
Have someone listed all Sarissa-related funds on where they hold their shares? I think they were listed in some 13D filings.
Thanks,
Thonn.
Reliance Global Group Announces Referral Partnership With National Retail Solutions
“Given the limited float and strong fundamentals of our business we have no current plans for a reverse stock split and remain laser focused on driving shareholder value.”
It's getting uglier and uglier... I'm out. Good luck, see you in a few months!
Are Hikma, Reddy's and Apotex really making money from the sale of Generic Vascepa?
https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000014051
It says that data is not complete until September 15, 2022.
We should ask ourselves: why isn't Sarissa increasing her position in AMARIN now that the price is down more than 60% since her initial purchase? If at first they already considered that the company was significantly undervalued... now what is it? and even so, there is no evidence that they have increased their position.
"plaintiffs and healthnet have reached an agreement regarding the remaining two claim terms in dispute and therefore believe the remaining claim construction briefing deadlines and Markman hearing can be canceled"
Check out @steven1x message on StockTwits http://stocktwits.com/steven1x/message/437830685
It's all about pricing. Again.
About Go-to-Market strategy:
NRx scripts for week ending February 19, 2021 (~ a year ago) were 37,861, this week may not be representative because it includes a holiday (president's day).
NRx scripts for week ending February 26, 2021 (~ a year ago) were 44,355.
NRx scripts for week ending February 11, 2022 are 53,154.
+19% yearly in NRx.
Can't compare with older data because I don't have it.
NRx number has only been above 50,000 5 times:
- Week ending December 10, 2021: 51,088
- Week ending December 17, 2021: 51,953
- Week ending January 21, 2022: 50,882
- Week ending January 28, 2022: 52,058
- Week ending February 11, 2022: 53,154 (last week, all-time high)
Note that all these achievements have been achieved with Karim's strategy in place and with the reduction of the sales force.
To say that Karim's strategy regarding the promotion of Icosapent Ethyl does not work is objectively wrong.
The "NRx" number, that is, the new Icosapent Ethyl (Vascepa + Generic) scripts, is at all-time highs (at least since February 2021, when Raf started uploading the data).
Karim's strategy works, at least, at the general marketing level of the product (Icosapent Ethyl, not Vascepa); generics continue to benefit the most from sales growth.
Unfortunately, although we would all like it not to be the case, if EPADI doesn't have standing, then everything related to fraud does not matter, since it is provided by someone without standing... it has no legal validity.
Without a doubt, the main problem of the case is standing... if that problem is overcome, the arguments of rule 60 could be enough to, at least, reopen the case. At that point, I doubt that what happens next is in the hands of EPADI.
Thonn
Is there any page where to follow the rule24/rule60 procedure?
I mean, the same as the one to follow the case against HealthNet, but in the case defended by Marjac.
Sorry if it's been posted recently, I have not seen it.
Thonn
Excellent job Marjac, you couldn't have done better. You have done everything in your power, now we just have to wait.
Whatever the outcome, I thank you for everything you've done for us.
Thonn
Does the US CAFC have enough budget to buy some good microphones? it doesn't seem
Marjac, many here have already wished you good luck, I don't think you need anyone else doing it.
I would like to thank you, you and the entire EPADI team, for all the work carried out to date, and express my confidence that tomorrow, whatever the final result, you will have done everything in your power to fix the situation.
Tomorrow you enter hostile terrain, I hope that the panel knows how to listen to our claims and that it is the beginning of a new stage in Amarin.
I insist, whatever the result, thank you very much for everything, without you we would not have come this far.
Tomorrow is the big day, rest. We believe in you, we will be listening.
Thonn
The issue is that Judge Du ruled that the patents that were not valid, for reasons of obviousness, were those linked to the MARINE indication; while the patents linked to Reduce-It were valid.
The approval in Europe was carried out in such a way that it only included the indications of the Reduce-It study, and not those of Marine, so there should not be any patent problems related to what has happened in the US so far.
Thonn
If I remember correctly, the patents linked to MARINE do not influence Europe, since the indication approved by the EMA only includes the reduction of cardiovascular risk (Reduce-It).
I think I'm right, but I'm talking from memory. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Question: How to explain the positivity of the REDUCE-IT trial, when all the other primary or primo-secondary cardiovascular prevention trials that were carried out with omega-3s in the same period failed? I put aside in this question the JELIS study since it is a Japanese study with all the particularities of Japan, and the results are difficult to transpose to a European population.
Answer: On the discrepancy between the other trials with omega-3s and the REDUCE-IT trial and the JELIS study, it seems to me that the first explanation is the dose. That is, only three trials tested high doses of omega-3s, namely STRENGHT, JELIS, and REDUCE-IT. All of the other trials, including VITAL, ASCEND and all of the previous trials, tested doses that were less than 1 gram per litre, sometimes using commercial omega-3 supplements as well. However, we know that commercial omega-3 supplements have a content that is in fact often lower than that advertised, that they often contain oxidized liquids, and that their pharmaceutical quality is not absolutely ideal. It is known that oxidized lipids, in particular, are probably deleterious. Too low doses, with unreliable omega-3s, explain in my opinion the lack of effect of the other trials. For me, the real discrepancy is between STRENGHT on one side and JELIS and REDUCE-IT on the other, since these are the three trials that used high doses. Here, we are forced to note that STRENGT uses EPA and DHA, which have biological effects that are still notoriously quite distinct, and that the two positive tests use pure EPA. The two high-dose pure EPA tests are positive. All EPA/DHA tests are negative, and all low dose tests are negative. I think it is therefore the fact of using EPA in high doses that explains the discrepancy.
VAZKEPA 08122021 TRANSCRIPTION CT19428
and mineral oil comes back… Amarin needs to do something more aggressive about that, or it will continue to appear in the recommendations of all European countries.
I'm not assuming they've lowered the price. I have only replied to a colleague who commented on that possibility.
Thonn
I'm aware of confirmation bias, I'm just reasoning from a hypothesis.
I'm not sure what you mean by your friends' information. It is clear that not all Americans who have had a heart attack take Vascepa... otherwise the scripts would be much higher than they are!
Thonn
It's always good to read different opinions, glad to read your comments too! :)
Thonn
I'm not sure. From the letter I've posted, I'd say CVS only offers Vascepa brand. But I can't tell you for sure. It is likely that someone on the board can help you better than me, sorry.
Thank you for your comments.
I agree with what you say, although I would like to make a nuance: they would not be reducing the number of gV scripts, they would be increasing the number of branded Vascepa scripts (in other words, increasing the number of vascepa + gV globally). The number of gV scripts would not be reduced because of what I have mentioned before: it would be prescribed by other insurers.
Therefore, we would only be adding the scripts that previously tried to change to gV without success. Unfortunately we do not have access to data on scripts that are not being filled. It could be a lot, in which case we should see a weekly increase, or a few, in which case we probably won't notice a difference.
To estimate this number, perhaps the term New-to-Brand (NBRx) that Karim presented to us at the last conference is a good indicator, since part of these "new people" may be the ones who are not being able to fill out their script...(?)
I don't know.
Thonn
None of the generic companies claimed to have supply problems. Nor do I claim it. Karim has mentioned it on more than one occasion, that generics will have a supply limitation.
The data we have (thanks to Rafunrafun) can make us believe that this supply limitation is real, since we see a stagnation between 12,000 and 14,000 weekly.
Based on this suspicion, I have made a series of comments, assuming that such limitation is actually taking place.
It is very important that you understand that I am not stating anything, simply making comments based on an assumption, which may (or may not) be true.
It is part of my job, as a mathematician, to work with hypotheses. In this case, the hypothesis would be the existence of a supply limitation, and the conclusions would be all those that I have commented on in my previous post.
Thonn
Don't get me wrong... The nuance I make at the beginning is very important: "assuming that the only limitation of generics is supply...".
I agree that under normal circumstances, where generics can produce all the product they want, price cutting can be effective.
In our case, where generics have supply limits, the only thing that prevents them from selling more is that they don't have more product to sell. Does the price reduction work in this case?
If the generics had more product, they would sell it. If Amarin lowers the price of Vascepa only for some insurers, then the generics will continue to sell all the product they have through other insurers.
Actually, the only thing that would prevent generics from selling more product is that there are no more Icosapent Ethyl prescriptions on the market (both new and Amarin), apart from the limitation of supply that there is currently.
But... assuming that the only limitation on generics is supply, then this price reduction you mention just gets that bottle of generic sold to a person from another insurer, and Amarin is reducing their income and benefits in these " new" sales. So, the new sales achieved here imply, on the other hand, that the generic bottles that are no longer sold at CVS are going to be sold at other insurers. The summary is that the number of Vascepa scripts does not increase... and Vascepa is sold cheaper, obtaining less margin from each sale. I'm not sure if the price reduction is the solution.
CVS switch from generic to brand.
Seen on ST:
Taking into account that Vascepa prescriptions are usually monthly or quarterly, if there have been changes in the formularies in January... we should start to notice these changes either this month (Feb) or during the month of April, more likely from the second trimester onwards.
I look forward to seeing what happens after April, when the changes that insurance companies seem to be making should already be noticeable.
78,500
Reduce-It patents
I don't have much legal knowledge regarding Health Net's claims on Reduce-It patents. Do they make any sense?
I understand that if Judge Du annulled only the MARINE patents, it is because the Reduce-It patents were correct and did not present any problem, right?
Thanks,
Thonn.
In my case, it doesn't have much to do with Denner, I mean, I was already following you since before Denner appeared.
As I mentioned the other day, I bought my first shares of AMRN before Du's decision. I've been reading you for a long time but I've never had anything to comment on; I don't follow any other IHUB forums, so I didn't have an account created either.
I discovered this forum on StockTwits, thanks to your posts.
The other day I decided to create an account and post a message because I was happy. The news of the Denner acquisition were very good and I wanted to share that good moment with all of you, and what a better way to do it than by thanking all the knowledge you have shared during all this time.
I was reviewing some pages of interest about Vascepa, and it has caught my attention that the following does not work correctly:
https://vascepa.copaysavingsprogram.com/
Does the page load well for you? I only see a page of plain text, and the images do not appear correctly...
Well, by the introduction I meant to make an iHub account and post a message on the board thanking all the participants.
But, if you ask, I'm not from the US, I'm European, a mathematician by profession.
My story with Amarin started after the Reduce-It results but before Du's decision. The first purchase was about $18, and I did a few trades. Thank God, at that time the AMRN position represented a small percentage of my portfolio and the Du decision did not have much of an impact.
My position has been growing over time; currently at an average of $3.76 (better than Denner haha). At this point I can no longer expand my position, but I have no plans to reduce it either (especially at these prices). It should be noted that apart from shares I also trade options on AMRN.
Denner's fate will be mine (and ours).
Greetings to all,
Thonn.
Good morning,
I have been following this board for a long time. I would like to take advantage of a day like today to introduce myself and thank you for everything I have learned about Amarin here.
All the best,
Thonn!