Replies to post #218575 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

Re: ASMB

I listened to the CC and thought it was well done. However, the stated rationale for testing only e-antigen+ patients does not entirely ring true, IMO, insofar as loss of e-antigen doesn't imply that you are making any headway wrt cccDNA.

Thanks DD. Just curious, what do you think would be an appropriate trial design to test for possible reduction of cccDNA? Or is there an entirely different endpoint you would seek to test in a P2a HBV trial?

I should add that I did take a position in ASMB. I know this is a highly speculative gamble, particularly with the run-up of the past few years. Part of why I took a gamble is because of the other big pharma players involved here (Roche, JNJ) in specifically testing a CpAM against HBV. It helps to at least add validation to the approach. And now at least ASMB has early clinical data for their CpAM. And it looks like at least based on early data that the ASMB CpAM may be at least as good as those others if not better (Roche CpAM appears to be BID and JNJ CpAM doesn't appear to reduce viral load as much, particularly in e antigen+ patients). And then ASMB has the 2nd gen CpAM that is 10x as potent to fall back on if needed that will enter clinic later this year. I wonder if any of the other bigger players here that don't have a CpAM could be looking in this space as well (GILD? BMY? others?) and what it would take for them to get more involved in the space.