Replies to post #153404 on Biotech Values

[dewophile]

link to preclinical activity of idix's ns5a and bmy's. when comparing to gild's note that when describing EC50 the former is in pM and the latter in nM

http://www.idenix.com/hcv/McCarville_et_al_EASL_2011_4.1.11.pdf

[mcbio]

i dont think achn has a gen 2/3 strategy, though i dont follow the company closely.

ACH-3102, ACHN's NS5A is supposed to be much more potent than BMY's daclatasvir per ACHN (sure, may just be talking book). It's true that I don't think they have announced a strategy beyond GT1 w/3102.

Also, they are testing ACH-2684, the supposed pan-genotypic PI in Phase 1 in GT3, but the comments in http://ir.achillion.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=675154 may not bode well for the GT3 results since they say that "additional assessments of GT 3 activity are currently under development" despite announcing the positive results in GT1.

I think ACHN's best chance is focusing development of 3102 beyond GT1 and 2684 beyond GT1 (other than GT3). That's their best chance I think; but their silence on this strategy will probably continue to keep me on the sidelines. It's possible that a partner could see the utility in doing this but until I hear some buzz from ACHN on this possibility, I may stay on the sidelines. It's also possible that they are silent on the possibility because they don't truly believe that 2684 and/or 3102 will have enough efficacy beyond GT1.

But, GT2 and GT4-6 collectively represent a nice opportunity. And one that's not overcrowded right now, like GT1. Why not focus there? Doesn't make sense to me.