Array Biopharma, Inc Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Array Biopharma, Inc

ARRY 8.400

-3.0%

Nov 3 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (284)	5/30/2014 11:58:17 AM
From: scaram(o)uche	Read Replies (1) of 321

>> Seems to me that Novartis, if forced to return MEK162 to Array, is a tad between-rock-and-hard-place. Genentech would be coming at them with a combo (vemurafenib/cobimetinib) that looks like it may be superior to Tafinlar/Mekinist, but they have the problem that LGX818/MEK162 is far behind in development (braf-mutant melanoma). So Novartis would be doing the deal, in part, to get a therapy that might not be long-term competitive, while simultaneously gutting their own effort. No? << onclive.com Adding a MEK inhibitor to a BRAF inhibitor has efficacy advantages, but also advantages with respect to reduced toxicity. We have observed that already with the dabrafenib/trametinib combination, but the benefits tend to be even greater with LGX818 plus MEK162. There's also this, relating to the LEE011/MEK162 trial.... In tumors that do not have a BRAF mutation, and have other mutations, such as NRAS or NF1, combining a CDK4/6 inhibitor with a MEK inhibitor is the strategy we think is the most scientifically and clinically relevant.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next