Mr. Moose:
Walter Moos, ex-Chiron, right?
The HIV-positive activist community includes very sophisticated individuals, who were either formally trained to look at data or have grown into the job. We are talking an entirely different patient population here, for a small fraction of patients. However, the educational trickle down to others will be pronounced, IMO, in part due to the net. There are numerous net-educated patients that have been waiting for Viracept to initiate treatment.
While I do not underestimate the power of Merck (see earlier posts in this thread), I also see 20-40% penetration as likely, not as a dream. Viracept will fit many lifestyles better, IMO, than crix.
On top of that, dual PI therapy is, IMO, coming. Merck is frantically trying to play catch-up with Roche. I'd predict that, within nine months, Roche's U.S. sales force will be promoting saquinavir in the context of Viracept. At that time, crix may just fade away.
This is a very visible, political disease. Getting educated about your treatment alternatives is a whole new ball game. Merck's detail reps aren't gods, Moose. Merck's scared, and irresponsible statements about the relative efficacy of crix and Viracept will just tick off the activists and influential physicians, IMO.
As a matter of fact, irresponisible statements such as that made in today's story may go a long way to undo what Merck has done to develop such a good repoire with HIV-positive patients.
To me, Merck made a heroic effort to bring crix through to patients. They saved lives, and the return on their investment is not yet in. We should all appreciate their efforts to date.
Cheers! Rick |
