Replies to post #171501 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

Re: GILD’s treatment duration

Isn't it a little harsh to think that the 8-week regimen is out the window because of a 3.7% difference in SVR (1.4% if we stay within ION-3)? …Your threshold for significant/meaningful appears very low in the above, esp. considering how little importance you attach to the extra 5.5% from going to 24 weeks in ION-2. Why the double standard? Cost implications cannot be the explanation - as you pointed out many times, GILD can do a cap program instead of charging double for the 24 week durations.

Cost (more precisely, price) considerations are indeed the explanation for the “double standard.”

Although GILD may be resigned to offering patient assistance in the form of a pricing cap for 24-week treatment durations, I don’t think GILD wants to open the door to receiving less revenue per patient from 8-week treatment durations. The totality of the ION-1/ION-3 data provides GILD a justification for not doing so.

Is this a double standard from a scientific standpoint? Of course it is, but it’s how I think things are going to play out.