Yeah, but the whole point of MNTA's technology is that they can make heparin at generic prices, right? How hard is it to take an SC injection when it costs your insurer 3X less and you have to deal with the copay?
In other words, you as the patient, money no object, would obviously take the oral solution if worked equally well. But will the oral solution be more or less expensive? That's the key question here. Anyone know?
I apologize for the grammatical error in the previous post. I'm guilty of posting under the influence, thanks to a woman from Costa Rica smacking my '06 Subaru WRX hard in the right fender seven hours ago.
"It’s as rkrw surmised in #22376: Goldberg says that MNTA is barking up the wrong tree because oral heparin will make all the injectable products irrelevant. It follow that Goldberg must think LMW heparins confer no significant advantage versus ordinary (unfractionated) heparin and, indeed, that’s what Goldberg has asserted."
Goldberg is misinformed to think LMWH has no advantage over UFH. Also, LMWH is only 1 of MNTA's products...MNTA has a diverse portfolio and does not have all its eggs in one basket.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
