Replies to post #140500 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

…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.

I concur with your conclusion, but not necessarily with your logic in getting there. Whether GILD does or doesn’t continue to collaborate with BMY makes little difference to Medivir’s prospects, IMHO.

…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)?

I think it’s too soon to say whether GS-5885 (GILD’s NS5A) is as good as daclatasvir.

…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.

If there are multiple regimens with roughly equal merit, Medivir may enjoy a home court advantage in the Nordic countries, but I doubt that this will be major factor one way or the other.

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

All told, I would say the EASL news to date is negative for ACHN and neutral for Medivir.