Replies to post #171569 on Biotech Values

[dewophile]

It will be interesting to see the data - perhaps certain subpopulations will be candidates for 8 vs 12 (viral load, 1b vs 1a). what will be difficult from a pricing standpoint is if a dynamic endpoint like viremia at 2 weeks can guide treatment duration

regardless i expect ABBV to adjust to whatever pricing scheme is out there by GILD and try to lock down a sizable minority of the market

however, for anyone with a choice of regimens i think GILD wins unless the PEARL data surprise to the upside because in the real world there will be more non-compliance than in trials, so if there is room to drop ribavirin and/or shorten treatment duration and still maintain very hgh SVRs that may play into treatment decisions

[caravon]

We did not see all the data. Consequently, it is too early to discuss marketing including pricing.

[DewDiligence]

Re: 8w vs 12w treatment duration

Not sure I agree that physicians will be enthusiastic about prescribing an 8-week treatment regimen that is off-label or quasi off-label (i.e. not explicitly sanctioned or contra-indicated in the label). An additional 4 weeks of all-oral therapy does not seem unduly burdensome in exchange for reducing the risk of relapsing, particularly in treatment-naïve patients where GILD’s cocktail apparently does not require ribavirin.

I don’t expect third-payers to push for an 8-week regimen unless it is explicitly endorsed in the label for certain subgroups.