Replies to post #193948 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

GLPG/ABBV -

I personally expect Abbvie to license it I see this as a very small investment to make even if their JAK compares favorably (I am guessing it does not but don't have much to go on besides vaguely recalling GLPG management mentioning seeing some preclinical data on Abbvie's JAK in much earlier CC's) it takes risk/competition away.

FWIW, I agree completely with you here. Would be a bit of a surprise to me if they don't license filgotinib for this very reason.

I thought the data especially for ACR-70 were particularly strong. Further there is more data on male 200mg dosing to possibly remove that restriction in Phase 3 (note this was in the US only). My main concern when I first saw results was the patient death. Its not clear what if any role filgotinib had nor apparently will it likely ever be known. But apparently the DSMB was not concerned enough to intervene and the company said no other deaths have occurred in any trial (including Chrohn's).

What odds do you give the pending Crohn's data being positive? That's another potential big catalyst I would think.

I thought the pre-clinical IPF drug sounded promising but then I saw that Janssen returned full rights even before seeing the potential clinical PoC data I think and without any kind of explanation in the GLPG PR (such as the customary "it wasn't a strategic fit for our big pharma partner" etc. etc.).

[poorgradstudent]

GLPG / ABBV:

I thought the data especially for ACR-70 were particularly strong.

I think overall the efficacy data were strong. The 100 or 200 mg total dose seems to be the way to go, and efficacy across those doses doesn't look too different to me. The numbers bounce around a bit, which suggests they're at the top of the efficacy range. For example, ACR70 has 100 mg > 200 mg if once a day but 200 mg > 100 mg if through twice a day dosing. No big deal, and it suggests they zoned in on a good dose range.

Will be interesting to see what ABBV does. They still need to run phase 3 trials for filgotinib, so perhaps ABBV may consider the opportunity-cost of how quickly they can get their internal candidate into phase 3 versus filgotinib? Might be expensive to lug 2 overlapping candidates through phase 3 trials in RA.