Doctors who treat autoimmune diseases have not had tools they are happy with to treat their patients. Many have used products like Rituxan off label in an attempt to help their patients, both in an effort to get better results, but also to get them off long term steroid use. They've done this in spite of the cost and the very long infusion times, usually 4-5 hours, but as long as 8 hours for some patient.
It isn't hard to imagine them looking very hard at V if it were approved for ITP when they would be using much less drug and giving it in an injection.
IMMUs strategy is a good one. If they get a good offer for V in oncology, they would take it. If they don't, they will move forward in a way that doesn't break the bank, but will get V into all the indications it works in, which are substantial.
These are the reasons I see V as the least risky molecule we have with regard to its chances of getting approved. I see the chances as being very very good, and Nycomed is footing the bill. I think it will work out very well for both companies, and that is what makes for a good partnership.
So, I've discussed one molecule here, and the reasons I think it is likely to be a successful one. We have more, and the stories on E-mab and hPAM4 are also compelling. They lack the deep history of the target like CD20 is, but they both have generated data that makes them interesting. But those are other topics. |
