Replies to post #91352 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

Re: IDIX/(ACHN)

the only other more proven class if you will are PIs, but that is also a more crowded field (although idx 320 is perhaps the most advanced PI that is potent enough for coformulation - if you think that would warrant a premium - so i am pretty excited about the poc data on this compound which should come by year end (moreso than the NNRTI)

ACHN's ACH-1625 is much further ahead than IDX-320 given that ACHN already has PoC for the compound and should be ready to start Phase 2 a little later this year. Do you not think ACH-1625 is potent enough for co-formulation? From the doses that IDIX has disclosed it will test with IDX-320, IDX-320 may very well turn out to be more potent than ACH-1625, but I think that ACH-1625 is plenty potent enough given that they've already tested the drug at 500mg BID and plan to go lower in future trials with the BID dose. They did indicate that the QD dose to be tested may be a higher daily dose than what they've tested in the BID regimens so far, but isn't that dosage still likely amenable to co-formulation?

I'm long both stocks, and actually have a bigger position in IDIX right now, but I also continue to feel that ACHN is being underappreciated for its progress to date. I hope to add more to my ACHN position in the near-term.

[DewDiligence]

Agreed—with one minor alteration: the 4-week results from the IDX184 phase-2a trial do not constitute RVR data for the reason mentioned in the * footnote of #msg-47150426. Regards, Dew