Replies to post #191869 on Biotech Values

[Rocky3]

Unless this is a one off thing (i haven't been following olysio Rx closely) the proportion of NRx to TRx for Olysio suggests it is being used in a lot of longer duration regimens.

It is not a one off thing. It has happened on and off since at least late February when the numbers were 429/146. Of course, most of this is just how the numbers work. So this week's TRx number for NRx of 65 would be added to renewals of 71 from 4 weeks ago and ~100 from 8 weeks ago, giving a potential TRx of 236 - so 205 is about right. It is just what happens when NRx declines happen.

I posted previously that sovaldi/olysio is probably the best option for harvoni and v pak failures and I bet many of the NRx for Olysio are for 24 weeks w sovaldi in these pts (especially after the emerging data on NS5A RAV after EASL - between harvoni retreatment data, MRK data, etc.)

Your general point is probably right - Olysio is being used for 24 week treatments at least in part and retreatment is one reason that it is being used at all. Though it still seems a little early for lots of failures, especially for V-Paks.

Much more surprising to me has been the failure of V-Pak TRX to exceed double the NRx number. It did this week (and has done twice before), but it should have done so every week since the mid March, and there have been three weeks when it did not (using Bloomberg numbers only). Even when it does, it is not by nearly as much as Harvoni, which is strange given that some of Harvoni is for 8 weeks. TRx for V-Pak should be higher given the NRx is my point and I don't understand why. Anyone?