Replies to post #157189 on Biotech Values

[mcbio]

According to Norbert Bischopberger, Sofosbuvir does not need to be supplanted by a better nuke, and the answer for genotype-3 could be adding a drug that is neither a nuke nor an NS5A. (Bischopberger rules out adding GS-5885, which has weak activity against genotype-3.)

This is precisely the line we should expect from GILD's Chief Scientific Officer, no? ; )

So, sounds like there is still clearly an opportunity for a better 2nd gen NS5A or perhaps non-nuke or PI that shows activity against GT3 (not sure which ones currently in the clinic do; I know simeprevir doesn't work on GT3). Also, sounds like less of an opportunity for a 2nd gen nuke if we are to believe the GILD CSO, but there may be a shot given that the follow-on nukes might be ready for the market around the same time of the follow-on drugs from other classes that could be potent against GT3.

[oc631]

Bischopberger rules out adding GS-5885, which has weak activity against genotype-3.

Since GILD is currently testing Sofo/5885 in GT3 it hasn't been ruled out but it's true expectations are low. The GT3 results from Sofo/Riba have set a low bar so it should be an interesting comparison.

[oc631]

According to Norbert Bischopberger, Sofosbuvir does not need to be supplanted by a better nuke, and the answer for genotype-3 could be adding a drug that is neither a nuke nor an NS5A.

GILD's path forward seems to be focused on these two classes. Either a dual-nuke strategy or a better NS5A. GILD's first stab at GT3 was using sofosbuvir combined with 30 year old ribavirin. What should be noted here isn't that they fell short in GT3 but that they achieved such respectable SVR rates in GT2. It's a simple lack of potency. There's no question in my mind Sofo combined with IDX-719 couldn't provide the 90+% SVR rates that we are seeing in other genotypes. That's why the idea of Sofo/Riba being approved for use in GT3 patients, for me, is so appalling.