InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 45
Posts 1513
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/25/2013

Re: None

Thursday, 11/14/2019 6:58:46 PM

Thursday, November 14, 2019 6:58:46 PM

Post# of 425619
I am having trouble getting excited about what I heard at the Adcom.
The question was so basic that it was impossible to vote no. 16-0 was a given in my mind.
I am a little concerned about all the negative talk about primary prevention. Prior to the vote it was a full bashing party against primary prevention. It wasn’t until after the vote that they started talking positively about approving primary prevention. It was almost like they were originally talking about primary prevention as anyone with risk of CVD and not specifically about the cohort of DM2 with another risk factor in the trial. After the vote they all (or at least most, 2 definite holdouts for only approving secondary prevention) switched their view to approving DM2 if only the higher risk pts.
I can see GS reiterating their $17 PT and claiming the tone of the discussion prior to the vote implied that only secondary prevention will be on the label.
Hope I’m off on my interpretation but it was a roller coaster day.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AMRN News