Replies to post #1402 on Idenix Pharmaceuticals (IDIX)

[DewDiligence]

>Although I expect tenofovir to displace adefovir as monotherapy, I wouldn't be surprised if it [adefovir] hangs on as a player in combos, at a lower price point…<

Adefovir (Hepsera) is more expensive than tenofovir (Viread) and will remain so. GILD cannot charge a premium for Viread in HBV because the Viread price is set by the HIV market.

>…since it seems that the cross-resistance patterns between adefovir and tenofovir might not be as troublesome as one might expect based on structural similarities.<

If you’re suggesting that Viread + Hepsera will be a commonly used combination, I think you’re out to lunch. Extremely unlikely, IMO.

>…NVS, should they choose, will be able to buy the balance of IDIX at a price not very far removed from the current price.<

Again, I strongly disagree. The current enterprise value (~$50M) would be about right, IMO, if Tyzeka did not even exist.

[DewDiligence]

>Having Anna Lok say that Tyzeka has "a limited role in HBV monotherapy"…<

The same kinds of remarks were made about Baraclude circa 2005—I heard them myself on the Q&A at BMY’s CC’s. But look at how Baraclude is doing now—not bad.

[dewophile]

"the combo tx. scenario will not fully play out until well after the standstill agreement date passes"

true..but such a scenario will still factor into the forward-looking commercial potential if/when a buyout offer is made/negotiated

.."Tyzeka sales are likely to disappoint for quite a while yet "

while I think this is largely factored into the current share price, I agree it coudl add some negative pressure if guidance is missed and/or lowered

"..and that NVS , should they choose , will be able to buy the balance of IDIX at a price not very far removed from the current price"

not if IDX-899 generates positive data..and that data will be in hand before the standstill is up

[DewDiligence]

GILD will cease promotion of Hepsera as soon as Viread is approved for HBV. This was confirmed on GILD’s 2Q07 CC last week.

Sorry, gofish, you really were out to lunch for suggesting in msg #1402 that both Hepsera and Viread will play significant roles in the treatment of HBV:

>>
Although I expect tenofovir to displace adefovir as monotherapy, I wouldn't be surprised if [adefovir] hangs on as a player in combos, at a lower price point…
<<

Your analysis is backward: it is in monotherapy where Hepsera will hang on for a while because patients who are stable on Hepsera monotherapy will stay on it until they have a viral breakthrough. However, there will be essentially zero patient starts on Hepsera—as either monotherapy or combination therapy—once Viread is commercially available in a given jurisdiction.

And for the second or third time (I lost count), let me remind you that Hepsera is not cheaper than Viread—it is 25% more expensive and GILD has no intention of lowering the Hepsera price. Viread, on the other hand, is comparatively cheap because GILD prices it for the HIV market and will sell it for the same price when it is used for HBV.