Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

Re: EASL consequential disclosures

I don't share ghmm's optimism with respect to ITMN-191. (And I wish I did given that ARRY would benefit from ITMN-191 success.) If it's becoming clear that the only way to resolve potential safety concerns with ITMN-191 is to utilize a lower dose that needs a booster, what's going to differentiate ITMN-191 in the clinic from much more potent and potentially safer PIs such as ACH-1625 and IDX320 that likely won't need a booster?

Agreed, and the same kind of rhetorical question can be asked about RG7128 and the other first-generation nukes (#msg-49115388).