Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Regeneron Pharmaceuticals -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Miljenko Zuanic who wrote (2757)	10/11/2019 3:41:42 PM
From: Miljenko Zuanic	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3557

RE: KSI-301 So, if drug is so potent and durable why they need 7X Lucentis concentration (molar basis) and 3 loading dose? I love "logic" at development stage bios!

To: Miljenko Zuanic who wrote (2757)	10/17/2019 1:15:51 AM
From: Miljenko Zuanic	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3557

OF TOPIC, RE: KUD <On slide 9, Abs in 301 is 68KD,...> This MW of 68KDa for abs in KSI-301 appears wrong. On slide 5 of October AAO presentation, MW is calculated to be 82KDa, based on 3.5 of EMD. On slide 15 of R&D presentation, it is mentioned to be 150KDa! Why every development bios need to FUXX public/investors with numbers? On slide 28 & 66 of R&D Day, again wrong presentation of data. Equivalent molar dose (EMD or equimolar dose) for KSI-301 relative to Eylea is not 14, it is barely 2 (for 5mg Abs dose, at 50mg/mL Abs-concentration or 310 mg/mL of ABC 301 concentration). And with potency that is at least 7X weaker than Eylea , how can KSI-301 with 3 loading dose reach level of efficacy (in BCMA letters improvement) that Eylea show? Most likely in pivotal trials (with current dosing design/regime) KSI-301 may be found inferior to control arm. In that case DURABILITY means very little, IMO.