There’s nothing really bad in today’s PR as far as I can tell, but the new data do not dispel the notion that ANA598 will have a rash problem.
The “preloading” idea seems to have helped, but there was nonetheless a 21% (6/29) rate of reported rash in the ANA598+SoC arm. As the ANA598 dose is raised to 400mg BID (and perhaps higher), the incidence of rash can be expected to increase.
In #msg-44635086, genisi noted the lack of an ANA598 benefit in VL reduction relative to controls in the gentotype-1b group, but I consider this statistical noise due to the tiny patient numbers of 7 and 3, respectively. Had the ANA598 arm’s RVR rate in the geno-1b group been no better than the control arm’s RVR rate, I would be more concerned, but it was in fact better.
Moreover, the mean log VL reduction in a small cohort can be a misleading metric—it is easily skewed by a difference between arms in VL at baseline because no individual patient can see decline of more than the baseline figure. Regards, Dew
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated in any area of human knowledge!”
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.