Replies to post #247420 on Biotech Values

[rfj1862]

But there are still many cancer indications where traditional chemo is the SoC that ought to be ripe for penetration by ADCs.

The main point here is that ADCs are easy (relatively) so there are hundreds of them in pipelines for many different indications.

Again I make no argument about clinical value, particularly relative to conventional chemotherapy, just that dozens of companies and multiple molecules per target make this a poor space from an investment standpoint.

And setting aside first-gen agents with unstable linkers, I really don't think different linker technologies are going to make a meaningful difference in efficacy. I don't know how you can say they "make a big difference in safety" without a true head-to-head.

[DewDiligence]

Re: ADCs

https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/seagen-ceo-david-epstein-his-next-stop-pfizer-acquisition-and-adc-competition

[SGEN CEO] Epstein predicts that ADCs will become more effective and less toxic and that they will be used earlier in treatment sequences and in more combinations. “In many places where standard chemo is used [it] will be replaced with ADCs and patients will have longer lives because of it,” Epstein said.

Sounds like Epstein and I are on the same wavelength—at least until the PFE deal closes, LOL.