Replies to post #209750 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

Re: RVNC /neutralizing antibodies /“yuck” factor

I see reports of [Botox] neutralizing antibodies in aesthetic application too.

There are cases of neutralizing antibodies to Botox from use in cosmetic indications, but this is much less common than in therapeutic indications due to the smaller cosmetic dose.

An immune response rate that is sufficiently lower than the competition will pay dividends down the road if it is demonstrable. I don't see value right now.

This is like saying that a company’s tax rate doesn’t matter until the company has profits, which is patently false. Anything that affects the future profits of RVNC is relevant to the current valuation.

I also don't see value to the 'yuck factor' if they are already willing to be injected with a botulism toxin.

First of all, botulinum toxin is not a form of botulism (although many people think it is). Any physician who does a lot of work with botulinum toxin will tell you that there are potential patients who refrain from being treated because of the “yuck” factor (human albumin) described in this thread; these people should be good candidates for RT002.

What would be interesting to know is if RT002 is enough different from other strains to be able to treat some number of treatment failures from those strains.

For Botox or Xeomin*, treatment failure occurs for one of four reasons: 1) botulinum toxin simply doesn’t work for the patient and indication in question; 2) the injector is incompetent; 3) the dose is too low; or 4) the patient has neutralizing antibodies to the specific brand of toxin.

If a patient does not get a satisfactory result on another brand of botulinum toxin for reason #4 (neutralizing antibodies), RT002 can almost certainly overcome the problem.

*Dysport treatment can fail because the drug disperses too much.