The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Industry Discussions / Biotechnology

URL:  https://boards.fool.com/what-i-was-suggesting-is-aducanumab-sets-a-a-very-34885657.aspx

Subject:  Re: SAVA and INMB Date:  7/24/2021  11:24 PM
Author:  sheila727 Number:  25642 of 25643

What I was suggesting is aducanumab sets a a very low standard by the FDA, many other candidates think they can do far better for AD patients both in safety and efficacy.

The impression you had given when you said: "they think BIIB's results are relatively easy one to improve upon,"--at least to me--is that they won't have to perform "far better" at all, but simply represent some modest degree of improvement over aducanumab.

Meanwhile medicare and insurers will have started getting used to paying $56K / yr for treatment, priming the pump for the next better drug to take that market share.

Again--you're ignoring the broad and highly vocal push-back against this exhorbitant cost. It is considered off-puttingly high even for a drug that actually works. And in addition, that $56K/yr is only part of the cost. Add in the monthly brain MRI $$ to catch brain swelling early, when it's developing. And then for those patients who are experiencing that adverse effect, there's the $$ for treating them.

aducanumab sets a a very low standard by the FDA, many other candidates think they can do far better for AD patients both in safety and efficacy.

Not unless they've found a target that actually inhibits further progression. And even better--enables repair of current damage. Beta-amyloid ain't gonna do it. That is quite clear by now.

I don't think you're taking the spectrum of significant realities into account.

=sheila
Copyright 1996-2021 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us