Replies to post #119026 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

I would characterize the CATT results as a commercial victory for Roche and NVS. The lower frequency of SAE’s in the Lucentis arm missed statistical significance (using a 2-sided 95% CI) by a whisker with an HR of 0.775 (1/1.29). This combined with the CATT retinal-thickness data (which were statsig in favor of Lucentis) and the data from the Johns Hopkins/Medicare study (#msg-61713973) make a strong case for Lucentis, IMO.

Blindness isn’t something doctors should want to risk just to save some money for the healthcare system.