InvestorsHub Logo

willyw

09/26/19 4:31 PM

#1808 RE: DewDiligence #1807

Oh, I'm in agreement that Viekira wasn't a bust either for the company or for investors. It (and several other compounds and therapies) weren't the first and final iteration of what has become (what appears to be) the final HCV treatment. (IMHO, if money wasn't the object, it could be further developed to become more effective, shorter TX, improvement for certain harder to treat groups, etc- it just isn't economically feasible to try. It becomes harder as you approach 100% cure rate))

"HCV is neither"
Yes, that is true today, but as little as 7 years ago they had a completely different MOA, didn't understand the relatively great difference in response in various groups, genotype, alleles, and resistant mutation issues or with the toxicity of the interferon based therapies. I think I heard about the abbvie multiple cocktail in 2011 or 12, soon thereafter Gilead bought Pharmasett, just for one asset (7977) to be used w/IFN/RBV therapy, then in an antiviral cocktail. It's fairly recent history. Established now for 5ish years.

"NASH is a multifactorial and poorly understood disease"
I agree completely. Even now they are even trying to figure out how to diagnose NASH or how to quantify response, or qualify NASH damage for trials without biopsy.
I guess I am saying that ENTA is one of those who does possess some of that understanding of the disease, and if you were to compare results to Gilead or Intercept I cannot tell who is ahead. I haven't had time to compare the 3, but my guess is that ENTA did as well the 2 much larger companies.(but not strongly differentiated)
Perhaps this is why ENTA wants to press ahead. I think they possess a longer view than investors.

Comparing to back to HCV MAY be instructive for comparison reference.

Those companies without the understanding were not able to successfully acquire HCV assets. They spent lots of $$$ and ultimately failed. Ultimately, they couldn't buy, and couldn't develop internally so they backed away.

I'm just saying, ENTA seems to be prepared to fail a bit more, if that's requisite to do the work necessary for success.

ENTA remains a company with a strong background of success in liver disease and virology.