Bez needs to get his facts straight. Hire that CEO already!
Roche’s Tecentriq is approved for metastatic TNBC in the US, so it’s not accurate to say there are no options for patients in that setting. That said 50-60% of mTNBC patients are not eligible for Tecentriq given one’s PDL1 status.
On the flip side, he said there are 10k new TNBC patients per year. That’s also not accurate.
TNBC ranges from 10-20% of the total breast cancer population depending on age and ethnicity. Let’s call it 15% overall in the US.
Out of 270k cases of breast cancer in the US per year, that’s 40k newly diagnosed TNBC patients. Every year, newly diagnosed. 40k, not 10k.
The question is what percent of those 40k get mastectomies and don’t need drug?
What percent are getting Tecentriq?
Q3 US sales data shows 329M Tecentriq revenues in the US, assuming 80k US per I get approx 4k scripts in a quarter, maths to 16k patients per year.
Obviously some is being used in mUC, and sales look to have flatlined at 110M prior to Impassion 130 data.
So let’s say after 9 months Tecentriq has sold 230M (329 - 110) in a quarter in TNBC in the US, that’s a full year run rate of around 8k patients. And remember, Tecentriq is only given in TNBC if PDL1 positive, theoretically, so assume the market is actually 16k eligible patients, but only half are getting drug.
Bottom line is I think we are underestimating the market size of SG in TNBC. Will keep an eye on Tecentriq sales in the US to ascertain if flatlining or continuing to ramp up. 329M appears to be a realistic early target for quarterly SG sales, though, for both TNBC and mUC.
By the way remember that Keytruda failed to impress in TNBC, and Tecentriq failed to impress in late stage UC. Is SG more valuable that each, especially since no screening test is required in these two indications?
Would help if our “CEO” got his facts straight instead of pitching the company to retail investors at TDAmeritrade. Hire that CEO already, you’re fired! |
