Biotech Values

[ghmm]

I took a quick look at the slide. I was going by memory from what the different companies presented. I will assume Martin is presenting factual data from sources better than I could easily obtain. With that being said (and my science limitation caveat)... To me the ETa Affinity between sitaxsentan and RE-021 are both extremely low (and ambrisentan isn't too out of the ball park either). So it seems Martin is playing with degrees in selling RE-021 as the *only*. I don't have the knowledge to know if that will have a meaningful impact on safety and efficacy.

I do actually recall Encysive talking about trying sitaxsentan in several other indications (aside from PAH) though I was a UTHR investor and only interested in PAH.

If I were going to invest in RTRX for this compound I would try to see if sitaxsentan FSGS Phase 2 data was ever published. I would also look more into why it was pulled. Not saying RE-021 will have the same TOX but I'd want to be sure its not tied to the b receptor.

Just going by the history of ERA's I would be cautious on the safety side especially if the effect on Proteinuria is limited. BTW, I think Darusentan failed for efficacy reasons (in HF) I don't recall safety being a concern so its curious the effect on proteinuria is that high and Gilead did nothing in FSGS. Do you know what type of reduction in Proteinuria Retrophin think will be clinically meaningful?