Replies to post #33127 on Biotech Values

[Praveen]

Re REGN/VEGF trap

Thanks for your views Aslan. I have a similar opinion to yours on why VEGF trap might work better than Lucentis. So I can't try to convince you more:-)

But the adv of VEGF Trap over Lucentis might be the higher dose might work better? slower clearing rate and duration, less frequent regime than Lucentis probably quaterly? If VEGF trap doesn't show more efficacy or better dosing without the SE than Lucentis and with the cheaper avastin at the back, VEGF Trap won't get much in the market.

I am very skeptical of the systemic VEGF Trap due to the systemic adverse reactions. Need further data from VEGF Trap to be more convinced.

Best,
Praveen

[masterlongevity]

regarding your three possible examples that VEGF Trap could be better

1)Affinity is higher - but I'm not sure ultrahigh affinity is required for maximum efficacy

Lucentis already has more than 140x the affinity of avastin, yet avastin is efficacious in these pts (anecdotally comparable even) I don't see this having a mjor difference


2)Trap can also bind and trap co-agonists for the receptor, in the event that such agonists exist (conceivably important, but I'm not sure that it really matters here)

maybe, but i don't think this is too important

3)Retinal penetration, toxicity, and durability of the drug in the eye.

Lucentis fully prenetrates all layers of the retina. even the much larger avastin was shown to do this as was published in Retina. DNA originally stated that avastin theoretically does not penetrate.

the safety looks fantastic so i don't see an advantage there. durability maybe


The only advantages I see for any candiadate to take the lucentis throne is:

1)less intrusive delivery

2) less frequent dosing (although I think DNA will ahve worked out a less frequent dosing recomendation for Lucentis by the time VEGF Trap gets to amrket.