dia76ca, not sure if you read my yesterdays post elsewhere but posted about Triple combinations.
I'll Cut & Paste my post here as it fits the AstraZeneca discussion.
------------------------------------
[removed], I am SURE there is financial advantage in this deal for PPHM. AZ is behind on competition, AZ has paid 3 other smaller companies for collaborations, PPHM knows AZ competes with BMY, MRK and ROCHE for SOC and has negotiation power.
As I said on IHub, even if they would only pay for there own drug/treatment and PPHM for all the rest incl. Bavi and the infusion then this trial is going to be real cheap. Not spending is a form of income if you get in return that for which you would otherwise have had to spend.
And again, as [removed] posted the others CANNOT just IGNORE this PPHM deal. SOC is at steak here. The first one that will set it will force all others to do meaningfully better, and at this moment they can ONLY do that by also including Bavituximab in the mix.
And what is more. To beat that new SOC they'll have to move to a combo of 3 ingredients (incl. Bavi). The PD-1, PD-L1, CTLA-4, etc all mask things, so the more you disable the better the immune system will be able to address the situation. But you do understand that a treatment with 3 ingredients will be more expensive and even if it becomes SOC there are going to be financial limits for patients. But Bavi will be in both combos, so the BP will have to lower their prices to compete with the TWO component cocktail, not PPHM.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
