Replies to post #217337 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

IFRX vs CCXI

I don't understand how the IFRX approach in complement diseases is better than what CCXI is pursuing with their lead drug avacopan. IFRX is pursuing anti-C5a with an antibody whereas CCXI is taking a more selective approach with a pill in hitting C5aR specifically. See slide 16 of CCXI presentation showing more detail of approach: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/CCXI/6019127124x0x968844/82BAAA9A-8A2F-4977-9C9C-FF93DF0FC5E9/CCXI_Corporate_Presentation.pdf .

So, what is better about what IFRX is doing? A key point that should be noted is there doesn't seem to be a lot of overlap in disease indications between the two as CCXI is specifically targeting aHUS and C3G whereas IFRX is targeting hidradenitis suppurativa with the lead indication (but also targeting AAV which is lead indication for avacopan).