SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : biotech firesales
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Miljenko Zuanic who wrote (3602)10/23/2018 6:14:18 PM
From: tuck   of 3661
 
OK, you did mean mechanism of action. And I get your thesis now: not direct competition because it apparently binds to a different receptor subtype of IL-2, thus eliciting a different sort of anti-tumor response. That's a good point. But you said "Per MofA, it does not looks that RO6875281 will be combined with PD1(L1) as synergy combo regime, so general thesis of direct competition is not valid, IMO."

In fact, the different MOA is not stopping Roche from testing it in some of the same indications as 214, and in combo with their PD-1 drug, so it certainly is direct competition in that fairly important sense. Edit: now see you found evidence that is does activate similar subtype. It's definitely competing!

PS: time to move further discussion to the NKTR thread. I wasn't sure if there was one. I see you visit regularly now.

NKTR thread

Cheers, Tuck
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News