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 : NexStar Pharm(NXTR)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Biomaven who wrote (324)3/4/1999 3:18:00 PM
From: Chris Boylan  Read Replies (1) of 328
 
From PeterSuzman:
>Don't forget the excellent results they had for it with Hepatitis B.

This is very strong point you make. I attach a lot more value to PREVEON for the treatment of Hep B than I do as an alternative inhibitor for HIV. The Hep B phase II data was very strong but, if I recall correctly, they haven't started a phase III yet.

I just do not get the hype regarding alternative HIV treatments because I have not seen any indication that it's necessary [I have not done a literature search] and on the flip side there are some signs that HIV patients may be able to safely discontinue their treatments when virus levels drop to an undetectable level.

>GILD's 'flu efficacy looks better than Glaxo's (although it is always hard to compare across different trials) and the Glaxo AC seemed pretty open to a flu drug that has demonstrated efficacy.

That's how I read it too but there are still several problems:

1. If Glaxo's problem is as straightforward as it appears then
you have to conclude the project staff was basically stupid
when they designed the phase III and management was nearly as
stupid for submitting it. I'm willing to concede both but ...

2. I personally have only seen one small snippet of information
from GILD implying that their efficacy data is good or something
better than Glaxo's. Do you know more?

3. Can they get past the "yeah your GS4104 works okay but it's
basically useless because the window of usability is small and the
preceived improvement is minor" objection by either 1) FDA AC or
2) doctors/HMO's. If the improvement turns out to be something like
if your flu is moderately severe and last 5 days, GS4104 will
shorten it by 1 day and reduce severity on days 3-4 by 30%, who
cares? Who's going to get out of bed and see the doctor on that one?

Again, I've seen very little info from GILD on this.
Maybe they know the real market is prophylaxis and it's $200M/yr
but to me it seems like an awfully expensive alternative to a flu shot. I'd like to see some market analysis on this one.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News