Replies to post #139846 on Biotech Values

[biomaven0]

Being first to market in GT1 oral offers the opportunity to participate in the largest drug launch in history considering pent-up demand for interferon-free treatment.

One of the docs at Cowen made the point that for most patients there is no hurry to treat. Judging by his comments, he would also be reluctant to treat with any combo that might engender subsequent resistance if it failed. Other docs may not be so sophisticated, but it suggests that many docs might elect to simply wait if the first-to-market interferon free combo isn't top notch.

If we look at HIV, it certainly wasn't first-to-market that ended up winning.

Peter

[mcbio]

If GS-7977/Riba lacks potency in GT1/GT1A do you think GILD would partner with BMY or Tibotec as opposed to focusing only on an in-house combo?

Keep in mind, GILD already has the planned GS-7977/TMC435 combo study with Tibotec/Medivir.

[genisi]

If GS-7977/Riba lacks acceptable potency in GT1/GT1A do you think GILD would partner with BMY or Tibotec as opposed to focusing only on an in-house combo?

I think they'll do both i.e go ahead with the best partner to get a combo (that has a reasonable chance of beating ABT's 4-drug combo, at least on the adverse events side) to the market and keep developing a future next gen in-house one.

[genisi]

What's interesting about ABT is they are the dark horse in this contest. They are behind in development, with a somewhat sloppy combination, yet 90%+ SVR rates is a remarkable achievement even within this small study.

What I like about ABT is they are doing a very thorough work testing multiple combos of all three MoA (PI, non-nuke, NS5A inhibitor, and +/-Riba) for all the drugs they have in all the subgroups (genotypes, IL28b, prior treatments).