Replies to post #144377 on Biotech Values

[iwfal]

Roche is already developing the vast majority of its new molecules with a companion diagnostic in order to defined population groups to a drug's MoA as early as possible, because of all the obvious advantages (better early stage detection, finding likely responders/non-responders, improve patient outcomes, shorting development process, finding the better combination, and even improve reimbursement).

Ok, didn't know that (although the MetMab trial certainly hinted at that) - but based upon my reading of a reasonable number of clinical trial results (albeit mostly small biotech - with a smattering of big pharma) I'd say that that makes Roche a relative rarity (I assume it is really Genentech driving this). Most companies still tend to use histology as their primary subgrouping despite the data that kinase profile just plain seems to work better. I attribute this largely to: a) intertia, b) the traditional big pharma attitude that a wider population is better, c) the mild extra difficulty in getting testing done.