Replies to post #140459 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

ACHN’s drugs are potentially complementary; however, the more immediate concern—and the reason ACHN is down today—is that the results reported today by GILD and BMY may lessen the need for these companies to seek complementary agents.

First, it sounds as if GILD is not going to push forward with Phase 3 combo trials involving BMY's daclatasvir (if you believe the hearsay). If this is indeed true, it may put more pressure on BMY potentially needing another agent if the former INX-189 nuke doesn't turn out to be as potent and effective as GS-7977. As we know, BMY is going to run combo trials with daclatasvir+TMC435 and the former INX-189+TMC435. So, I still think Medivir is in a decent competitive position provided TMC435 delivers on the combo data. We'll see down the road what GILD's intentions are with TMC435 after combo results are out later this year but if they have no intention in pushing into Phase 3 with daclatasvir after strong early results, presumably they will think the same when it comes to TMC435.

Also, for ACHN, does GILD have an NS5A on par with BMY's NS5A or could this open up the door for them to do a deal with ACHN for ACHN's NS5A inhibitor(s) (and perhaps PIs as well)?

Second, given the later patient relapse with the ABT combo, perhaps SVR4 100% figure may not hold up as time passes and a third HCV DAA, like a PI, will be needed.

Third, is it widely anticipated that both GILD and BMY will have a presence in the Nordic countries where Medivir hopes to market TMC435 itself? Just curious if Medivir will have a competitive advantage in this market.

All told, do you view today's news as net negative for ACHN and Medivir?