InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 252496
Next 10
Followers 832
Posts 119982
Boards Moderated 17
Alias Born 09/05/2002

Re: Bio_pete post# 96898

Monday, 06/07/2010 10:46:29 PM

Monday, June 07, 2010 10:46:29 PM

Post# of 252496

If MNTA's injection requires 1 ml & TEVA's .5 ml then I'm taking TEVA's version whether its subjective or not.

Teva’s low-volume formulation will be a new branded drug, separate from regular Copaxone; it can’t be dispensed by a pharmacy or hospital formulary unless a doc knows about it and requests it explicitly. NVS/MNTA’s generic Copaxone, on the other hand, can be dispensed for any prescription of regular Copaxone (unless a doc checks the “no substitution” box that’s allowed in certain states).

For every doc who knows about the new formulation and likes the idea of lower volume and shorter infusion time, there will probably be two or three docs who opt to stay with regular Copaxone because it’s been on the market for two decades. I doubt that the low-volume formulation will garner more than a 25% share of the Copaxone market; the figure could be much lower than that depending on pricing and the amount of detailing Teva is willing to do.


“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.