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 : VD's Model Portfolio & Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: biowa who wrote (6710)	5/27/1999 10:36:00 PM
From: Biomaven	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9719

biowa, According to the company, the "in-the-field" trial was not powered to show differences between Claritin and nora. Because there is so much variability you need huge studies to prove anything. Nora clearly has substantially quicker onset of efficacy than Claritin; not clear if this advantage will be maintained over Claritin II. The SEPR drug is clearly a huge improvement over Hismanal, which itself was a >$100m drug before the safety concerns, slow onset of action and increased competition dragged it down to its present $50m. Zyrtec, with good efficacy but more drowsiness is a $500m drug. There are apparently enough differences among the existing antihistamine drugs that some work better for particular people than others. Hismanal actually has a pretty good reputation efficacy wise. Bottom line here is that I think they at very least have a good niche drug, which in this market means >$100m. The market risk is that it will get caught between generic Claritin (not for a few years yet) and the improved Claritin II. My sense is that if they undercut Claritin/Claritin II in price they will have enough time to establish a decent drug before the generics kick in. The HMO's are always happy to approve a cheaper, roughly equivalent drug. Peter