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 : Sepracor-Looks very promising -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Biomaven who wrote (1924)3/4/1999 10:25:00 PM
From: John Metcalf  Respond to of 10280
 
Great question, Don, and great answer, Peter. I would add a couple other reasons that drugs have a longer half-life than other products:

1) Physicians prescribe drugs, and their behavior is hard and expensive to change.

2) Generics have to be approved too, though the ANDA process is shorter than NDA. They still have to meet CGMP standards for manufacture.

3) There are sometimes patents on method of manufacture which can keep out competition. An ironic example is Albany Molecular's patent on Allegra manufacture.

4) New indications can add to the life of an approved drug.

5) There is a small number of large pharmas with the resources to compete meaningfully. Many good biotechs necessarily have their focus limited by lack of capital. Facing six or more years of clinical trials for a new drug, competitors must think long and hard before committing to development of a drug which would compete with a market leader.

6) If you have access to Value Line commentary on the Drug Industry, you'll find frequent comments about patent expiration, but fewer comments about losing share to competition.



To: Biomaven who wrote (1924)3/5/1999 11:19:00 AM
From: Don Miller  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10280
 
Thanks for the informative response.

One thing that I think we stock holders should be aware of is other solutions for the allergic or asthma patients.

There is a potential new drug series in trial for since about September. There was a piece on one of the new programs (NBC Nightline, I think)about the general concept. These new drugs are referred to as IG-E Blockers. The IG-E blocker is injected monthly and blocks the receptor site. The great thing about them as I understand is they block all allergins, not just those accessible to desensitizing shoots.

Turns out the private company, Tanox, was described as in partnership with Genentech and Amgen on this particular drug. There may also be others working on the same general concept. I deferred investing thinking those two big partners would diminish the reward too much. They should have already been reporting success. I could not turn anything up on IGE blockers, during November and December searches, not even Tanox appeared.

Tanox has a web site.



To: Biomaven who wrote (1924)3/5/1999 1:16:00 PM
From: Don Miller  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 10280
 
Is there Product Liabilities For Previous Makers of Racimatic Drugs?

SEPR has proven side effects can be reduced or eliminated. Could the racimatic drug supplier be liable for the consequences of a now known side effect? Of course any form of law suite is possible, but would such a allegation be reasonable?

If so, if new a supplier decided to be a generic producer, could such an allegation still be applicable?