Replies to post #71860 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

Ablynx: This is troubling.

I agree—in more ways than one. I thought the PR was unusually disingenuous even by biotech standards.

This target is clinically validated, so you can't assume this is a case of "drug works but target isn't clinically relevant." Also, P&G is dropping a drug to a validated target in late preclinical. It's unlikely that they could have made a tangible determination of whether or not the drug has the efficacy to compete with denosumab at this point. That suggests to me that there was a show stopper of some sort. Immunogenicity or the possibility that the drug is too rapidly cleared are possibilities that come to mind.

To date, this hasn’t been seen with ALX-0081/0681, although these programs are still very early.

My overall assessment of Ablynx is that is has some buyout vig, but not much else to make it attractive for investing. The main problem is competition: there are manifold companies developing small antibody-like drugs, and hence there’s a high probability that one or more of these techniques will prove to be better than nanobodies. Investing in Ablynx is (IMO) tantamount to a bet that some Big Pharma buys them out before it becomes common knowledge that another company’s platform is superior. This is not necessarily a bad bet, but it’s not a bet I’m inclined to make.

[DewDiligence]

PFE dumps Ablynx’s ATN-103 “nanobody” program:

http://hugin.info/137912/R/1560927/482953.pdf

This decision was rather predictable given the language in Ablynx’s PR from May 2011 (#msg-63230818, see bottom). Also see the related discussion in #msg-34955919.

Ablynx is holding a CC about this news at11am ET today. Expect a lot of spin regarding PFE’s decision to pull out, because such spin is very much Ablynx’s style (e.g. #msg-34954685).