Question posed earlier today on the Biotech Values MB. This is in response to a statement made by DueDiligence concerning the INFORM study undertaken by Roche..
D.D.:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Roche, dropping the program where ITMN-191 was being added to the SoC ought to be a relatively easy decision. The all-oral INFORM-n program is tricky, however: under the terms of the ITMN-191 license, Roche has financial obligations to ITMN if Roche develops any HCV PI, even if ITMN had nothing to do with it. Thus, Roche may try to combine RG7128 (the nuke from VRUS) with an oral drug from a non-PI class, which incurs no obligations to ITMN.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that VRUS has suggested a dual nuke combo might be all that's needed in a DAA I'm interested in hearing comments from those who feel that a guanine nuke (PSI-938/661) might/might not be Roche's substitute for ITMN-191. CEO Schaefer Price makes an interesting case for a two drug combo suggesting three drugs are needed in HIV therapy because of lifelong treatment but two complimentary nukes might be enough to eradicate the HCV virus. Does anyone feel the guanine program was started after consultation with Roche or did VRUS act independently? My feeling is we are looking at the next generation of SOC.
