Thanks for posting the phase-2 data for Regado’s RB006/RB007. This product candidate has several handicaps to overcome in the ACS indication that MNTA’s M118 does not have:
• RB006 is an aptamer—a kind of drug that does not have a good track record. (Macugen, which turned out to be a commercial bust with marginal efficacy, is the foremost example.)
• RB006 requires a proprietary reversing agent (RB007) to be reversed, while M118 can be reversed by the industry-standard reversing agent, protamine. The use of an unfamiliar reversing agent is apt to run into some pushback from clinicians, IMO.
• RB006 inhibits Factor IX, which is not as natural a place to intervene in the coagulation cascade for treating ACS as are FXa and thrombin (see diagram in #msg-26899675). Regado’s MoA is tantamount to temporarily inducing an acquired form of hemophilia B with RB006 and then restoring the patent to normal with RB007.
All told, as a MNTA investor, I’m more concerned about MNTA’s getting the funding to develop M118 than I am about potential competition from Regado.
“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.