Is the author suggesting that Caprelsa's $24 million dollar run rate can be improved upon because patients with MTC choose not to take it and more will end up choosing to take cabo due to higher efficacy? Or they'll be on cabo longer due to its efficacy, in turn generating more revenue?
I took the author as suggesting the former. Perhaps there's some truth to the latter as well, though.
Efficacy and treatment duration aside, Caprelsa prolong QT interval, caused Torsades de Pointes and sudden death in clinical trials, thus prescribed via a relatively strict REMS for an oncology drug, limited its use.