sulaco, good reasoning. I will not gamble and follow your "Merck is the partner" although it could be, I just don't know.
I would however like to add one little detail. When they wrote that Merck's anti-PD1 drug is worth 6 Billion $, they mean 6 Billion Dollar A YEAR! <<<IMO :)
So the question is, will their be ONE and ONLY ONE anti-XYZ in the final play (at least per condition) or will CTLA-4, PD-1 and others compete?
->If the answer would be NO:
Then being the winner is of MAJOR importance and Merck, Roche/Genetech, BMY etc will fight amongst them and to win (no matter how good they are on their own) the NEED BAVI! In all other cases they can berry their research and take their losses and very probably leave the related oncology markets (as I wrote before EXISTENTIAL for at least the Oncology departments).
->If the answer would be YES:
Then the patients will want the best and for the involved BP's to at least compete at a profitable level (get a reasonable market share) they need to massage THEIR companies FRIENDLY Doctors to drive the patient to their product. It is know Doctors do that BUT not if the gap is to big with competing products. So they ALL need Bavi to keep their results as close as possible to the better product.
Bottom line: PPHM with Bavituximab ALWAYS wins.
I would therefore say (depending on price setting of course) that it may well be that Bavituximab is the only one in the game that may be worth the said 6 Bilj$ because in the worst case scenario the BP's may have to share their part of the anti-XYZ's pie between them.