Replies to post #99984 on Biotech Values

[ghmm]

ITMN:

The [ITMN-191+SoC phase-2b] (boosted) trial actually sounds to have a more firm timetable for starting then past calls.

Not so, according to yesterday’s CC. The only timing change is that the trial start has been pushed back from 3Q10 to 4Q10.

Your correct, my mistake. Guess my memory is getting worse.

I finally listened to the entire call. I don't have a good sense for the (relatively) new R&D VP, Scott Seiwert, but from his comments I would think the INFORM program probably is on the slow track. In response to one question his answer while vague seemed to indicate they (ITMN/Roche) may want to see a fair number of monotherapy (191+SOC) patients in the boosted 2B study before proceeding in INFORM. I guess another alternative would be adding more cohorts to the 1B boosted study. Not much to base it on but I wouldn't be surprised if Roche gears their development towards relapsers perhaps even by adding a third anti-viral (I mean other then Ribaviran). Of course those more skeptical would say why bother with Danoprevir... I still haven't written it off though :-).

I don't know what it would be worth but Dan Welch seemed very open to selling Actimmune. They also seem to be talking about converting to the royalty option with Roche. I think that would be a good idea for them (actually anything to get their burn down) but then some may have a hard time justifying their current market cap with less upside. I was a bit surprised to hear Dan Welch say Pirfenidone partnering is not being pursued. Maybe they are figuring to take a swing at EU approval to save the company? I tend to be more conservative and would seek a partner if at all possible.