price is an issue & if it was < costly it would spur volume which would = + revenue.. several other disadvantages predominate right now vs injectable.. 1. injectable can be initiated immediately.. no waiting to prove stabilization for 6 months.. that is a huge hurdle.. (probuphine only appears to be approved for maintenance)..2. no REMS problems w/providers.. the shot can be administered probably by an LVN.. no need for MD/NP specially trained to perform a minor surgical procedure.. so it appears that injectables are > provider friendly than the implantable... but from a patient centered perspective, the power of the implant right out of the gate following detox is invaluable.. providing steady state for 6 months, even if MD may need to supplement occasional oral supplement & then titrate the oral down as needed... every person is different & docs need the flexibility to tailor treatment for each patient in order to assure a successful outcome... I don't understand why Braeburn has not approached the FDA to change the availability of probuphine as a fist line treatment.. why hasn't TTNP?.. they're obviously doing so in EU as their "partner" insists on that level of approval else they will walk away... why have they not re-applied in the US?... there's a new FDA perspective & no one has jumped on this at all... undoubtedly lots of stuff we don't know vs all the players.. like does Apple Tree think it can compete w/Indivior's marketing juggernaut for a me-too injectable?.. is Braeburn even a viable cash burn bottomless pit for Apple Tree going forward?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
