Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

Re: Most likely FoB partners for MNTA

Who is the most likely partner for MNTA on FOBs in your opinion?

The main criterion for an FoB partner, IMO, is the partner’s ability to manufacture and commercialize a biologic without engaging a third party. There’s a non-trivial risk of IP theft in any kind of FoB partnership, so it’s best to limit MNTA’s IP exposure to only the partner rather than the partner and a third party.

Companies that meet the above criterion and have publicly expressed an interest in FoB’s include the following, listed in order of highest to lowest likelihood (IMO) for partnering with MNTA:

• PFE. Pro: CEO Ian Read has taken an aggressive stance with respect to business development. Con: The FoB partnership would presumably have to exclude Enbrel.

• SNY. Pro: Respect for MNTA’s technology arising from an understanding of how difficult it was for MNTA to reverse-engineer branded Lovenox. Con: SNY has some branded biologics (including those acquired in the Genzyme deal) that could cause management to worry about cannibalization from FoB’s.

• MRK. Pro: No branded biologics whose sales would be at-risk in a broad FoB partnership. Con: Strategic alignment—MRK is already pretty far along with its plan to seek US approval of biosimilars using the conventional BLA pathway.

• NVS. Pro: Intimate familiarity. Con: Intimate familiarity. I would have ranked NVS first on this list if not for the publicly disclosed divergence of opinion between the two companies with respect to FoB’s.

JMHO, FWIW