Replies to post #198523 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

LGND -

So far no news has been good news concerning safety. In terms of differentiation, the angle you may be looking for could be in the study design using prodromal patients. Still a long shot. I look at MK-8931 as an underlying call option on the best long-term, risk adjusted play in biotech.

Thanks for the comments. So, the drug is being tested early enough where there is at least hope there can be some effect it sounds like. I think gantenerumab was tested in prodromal patients as well before P3 stopped for futility but also am assuming that drug doesn't reduce soluble amyloid beta, as MK-8931 does.

The CVR's under Cydex agreement (Captisol) expire near the end of next year so sales and licensing proceeds will go directly to LGND's bottom line. Sure a strong argument could be made the stock is currently overvalued. People have been saying that for years.

Perhaps currently but certainly wouldn't be expensive if around this valuation and MK-8931 shows any form of positive results. I also like that LGND has such a strong and diverse growing revenue base where any negative news on MK-8931 may not cause a sharp sell-off.

[mcbio]

LGND/MRK -

In terms of differentiation, the angle you may be looking for could be in the study design using prodromal patients. Still a long shot.

I always think it makes sense to pay close attention to what the big pharma partners are doing and saying in PRs/CCs to pick up on any clues. Just listened to MRK's 3Q15 CC and, unfortunately, MK-8931 only came up at the very end of the CC during Q&A. Hopefully that's just because the data is a bit further out and not of immediate importance to MRK. Anyways, it was noted that MRK hopes for data in 2017 on mild-to-moderate patients (no specific reference so I'll just assume that means towards end of 2017). It was mentioned that they expect the trial to run to completion and so it sounded like there would be no interim look. Perhaps that's a positive clue on safety I suppose but no clear read on efficacy. There was no specific mention on the other trial (prodromal patients) so unclear to me when we can expect any data on this trial which is presumably the one that has a better shot of showing a positive signal.