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 Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: rkrw who wrote (18195)10/29/2005 11:38:34 PM
From: DewDiligence_on_SI  Respond to of 52153
 
Re: LAF vs Byetta

Much more LAF data will be out in the next few months, so we’ll be in a better position to compare then. LAF missed the non-inferiority endpoint in one phase-3 testing LAF mono vs Metformin mono; however, NVS says it has enough other pivotals to get the job done and, in any event, LAF won’t be positioned as monotherapy.

Oddly, the EMEA wants to see results of an LAF mono vs sulfonylurea mono, so the LAF submission in EU will be delayed relative to U.S.



To: rkrw who wrote (18195)10/29/2005 11:44:05 PM
From: DewDiligence_on_SI  Respond to of 52153
 
Speedel is publicly traded btw.

Might be worth a look. What say you?



To: rkrw who wrote (18195)10/30/2005 7:05:04 AM
From: Biotech Jim  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 52153
 
In my view the DPPIV inhibitors will not have sufficient substrate available to block metabolism in the circulation. The inhibitors will be useful in some but not all patients. An oral agonist with safety and tolerability would be the grand slam home run.

The weight gain effects and the beta cell neogenesis will be key here. Does anyone know if the NVS or MRK inhibitors get into the CNS? There is sufficient reason for blockade in CNS pathways as well as in the periphery, though at least some of the incretin peptide sites of action in the brain are at sites of compromised (ie leaky, no tight capillary junctions) blood brain barrier.

JMHO.

BJ