In other words, ACH-2684 is simply a protease inhibitor with several desirable characteristics; it was silly, IMO, for ACHN management to promote this drug candidate as having a novel MoA when it clearly doesn’t.
Based on what I heard, I agree that 2684 simply sounds like an improved PI. I don't know if the reference to the "P3/P4" region of binding against the NS3 protease has any relevance in differentiating the compound. Do you know if this is a common target of other HCV PIs?
Many of the arguments ACHN is making in favor of ACH-2684 apply to other new PI’s such as IDIX’s IDX320 (#msg-45598790).
True. Although 2684 may have a much longer half-life than IDX320 (greater than 120 hours vs. 8-10 hours, respectively, although that obviously will be determined in the clinic). I'm long IDIX too so I've got that angle covered. ; ) IDIX is actually a bigger holding in my biofolio since I sold 25% of my ACHN position in the 3s.