Replies to post #134284 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

Nexavar sales are currently around $1B/yr, although I'm not sure of the split between RCC and HCC and other indications. So a drug that is superior to Nexavar and has a similar S/E profile is likely to be at least a reasonable commercial success.

The expectation is that tivo's S/E profile is better than Nexavar, isn't it?

[NP1986]

My guess would be that the majority of Nexavar sales come from liver cancer. Furthermore, it is likely that much of its use in kidney cancer is in patients who are intolerant to Sutent, not as first line therapy.

[jq1234]

But Nexavar is still used in RCC despite being clearly inferior to Sutent.

Nexavar sales are currently around $1B/yr, although I'm not sure of the split between RCC and HCC and other indications. So a drug that is superior to Nexavar and has a similar S/E profile is likely to be at least a reasonable commercial success.

Nexavar is used almost exclusively in 2nd line RCC after Sutent. Its market share even on 2nd line has declined steadily to below 50%. The revenue growth has come almost exclusively from HCC.

The Tivo trial is geared toward competition against Sutent, 70% of patients in trial were treatment naive. If it were to compete against Nexavar in 2nd line setting, they should have included at least 50% patient population with prior systemic treatment. AVEO didn't breakdown number from that 30% patient population, based on other numbers provided, my guess is the number didn't differ from Nexavar that much. This kind of leaves tivo in no-man's land. Let's say it takes half of Nexavar revenue from RCC, which isn't that much.