Replies to post #156713 on Biotech Values

[poorgradstudent]

MM:

Wonder if this is net positive or net negative for ARRY and ARRY-520. Negative in the sense that it's another competitor on the market ahead of 520. Positive in the sense that it provides a roadmap for potential approval for 520 (if the data ends up supporting that; early days still for 520). Positive in the sense that approval for CELG here could make ONXX even more open to doing combo trials of kyprolis+520 (these are ongoing now but it's unclear that ONXX has clear interest as I believe these are ISTs). I.e., clear good news for one competitor in the space may put pressure on others to attempt to further differentiate their drug.

I still feel you're projecting ARRY's motives onto the established company (be it CELG or ONXX).

The trajectory in MM has been approval in third line (w/ dex) and then follow-up trials to improve upon earlier lines of standard care, with the companies racing to gain the favour of the 2-3 thought leaders in MM. I'm not sure what CELG or ONXX would gain by running a combo trial in 3rd line with someone else's investigational drug. This is especially true since the onus is on ARRY to prove the value of their drug, rather than CELG / ONXX trying to fight over a few more patients in the third line.

Hopefully I've got it all wrong here, but I really don't think ONXX or CELG are going to do ARRY any favours for 520. CELG and ONXX's drugs are readily available on the market, so if ARRY is confident they should jump on the combos themselves.