Mono therapy ceases being mono if it does not achieve 100 percent with the positive biomarkers that CYDY identify in the future. One can't say that, in mono therapy, Pro 140 is successful in 80% of the patients with the identified biomarkers. There is a reason for combination drugs, not because individual drugs in HAART regimen ineffective in mono for 70% or X% of the patients, but because reducing VL is like going through multiple layers of cleansing. If one drug takes care of 80% of patients, the second drug will take care of another 90% of the remaining patients, the third will take care of 99% of what is left.
Adjunct is a sure thing. Some here speculate so wild about the potential of adjunct drug buyout, without evening look at how biotechs are valued. Usually, 30 percent of the total sales over 10 years. So, there is a ramp up like four years to reach annual peak sales. This puts the value of company: 2.4 (30 percent times 8) times the annual peak sales. Those who dream of $5B for a mere Adjunct should know how it is possible.
5B = 2.4 * annual peak sales; as a consequence, annual peak sales = 2.1B. VERY HARD to achieve 2.1B sales in adjunct during a peak year. Why is it hard?
On one end of the spectrum, we have 25K patients in the US. Usually, 50% conversion rate is applied. 12000 * 25k per annum = 500M (annual peak sales). This leads to 1.2B BO for adjunct.
On the other end of the spectrum, every HIV patient in HAART regimen would get PRO 140. Will this happen? Yes, it would, if it were another pill. It is SC. So, there are issues of self-administration, disposal of PRO 140.
Don't call me a basher or shorting Pro 140, just because I don't agree with others wild speculations and on rational grounds. I know how it feels like a bag holder, which I was before many times.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
