I can’t see the business model you’re referenc
Post# of 154942
(Total Views: 409)
Posted On: 07/07/2025 10:51:39 AM
I can’t see the business model you’re referencing because I have that poster in ignore. So I’m happy to continue not knowing, but I did want to say comment on the idea that any company should want LL regardless of if they own a checkpoint inhibitor, as well as the idea of first mover advantage and class effect.
It’s true that any company should want LL. It’ll be extremely valuable as a necessary tool to help other important drugs work, let alone being able to work on its own. Add in the platform capabilities of Leronlimab and it’s worth a boatload regardless of whether or not the company ultimately partnering or acquiring has a checkpoint inhibitor.
If they do have one, well then they have a big advantage, assuming they are the checkpoint included in the rollover trial for crc and/or they’re the drug of choice in the phase 3 mTNBC trial. That’s because the only evidence available that shows the combo working will be LL and that drug. At least for a while.
Some doctors will assume a class effect and feel confident and comfortable with using a different checkpoint inhibitor. Or they’ll need to because of some sort of patient specific or insurance coverage need. But most are going to go with the tested combo to ensure the best opportunity for their patient to receive the benefit. Drug formularies/benefits and protocols will choose the exact combination as well.
But as time wears on and other drugs test with LL, they’ll probably see the same effect. It’s not a slam dunk, though. There are many classes of drugs where they act the same way in/on the body but only one was ever able to show some sort of additional effect. Or the second drug could be better, like in the case of Viagra and Cialis. Viagra had the head start and held the lead, but who knows? When it comes to oncology they’re looking at more months alive, which should force a change to the better drug (if that were to be proven out in a trial) versus erectile dysfunction and some dude who just wants to feel 18 again.
And eventually, some decision made by insurance companies based on cost and rebates will move one of the ICI drugs into the first slot on formularies, and that may not be the one first proven to work with LL. But for the first X number of months or years it’ll be the drug chosen for these first trials that takes the biggest slice of cake.
Long story short, there should be (but probably won’t be) a bidding war that contains more than just pharma companies with checkpoints. But ultimately I think the companies with one are watching more closely, and the payoff for them is greater.
It’s true that any company should want LL. It’ll be extremely valuable as a necessary tool to help other important drugs work, let alone being able to work on its own. Add in the platform capabilities of Leronlimab and it’s worth a boatload regardless of whether or not the company ultimately partnering or acquiring has a checkpoint inhibitor.
If they do have one, well then they have a big advantage, assuming they are the checkpoint included in the rollover trial for crc and/or they’re the drug of choice in the phase 3 mTNBC trial. That’s because the only evidence available that shows the combo working will be LL and that drug. At least for a while.
Some doctors will assume a class effect and feel confident and comfortable with using a different checkpoint inhibitor. Or they’ll need to because of some sort of patient specific or insurance coverage need. But most are going to go with the tested combo to ensure the best opportunity for their patient to receive the benefit. Drug formularies/benefits and protocols will choose the exact combination as well.
But as time wears on and other drugs test with LL, they’ll probably see the same effect. It’s not a slam dunk, though. There are many classes of drugs where they act the same way in/on the body but only one was ever able to show some sort of additional effect. Or the second drug could be better, like in the case of Viagra and Cialis. Viagra had the head start and held the lead, but who knows? When it comes to oncology they’re looking at more months alive, which should force a change to the better drug (if that were to be proven out in a trial) versus erectile dysfunction and some dude who just wants to feel 18 again.
And eventually, some decision made by insurance companies based on cost and rebates will move one of the ICI drugs into the first slot on formularies, and that may not be the one first proven to work with LL. But for the first X number of months or years it’ll be the drug chosen for these first trials that takes the biggest slice of cake.
Long story short, there should be (but probably won’t be) a bidding war that contains more than just pharma companies with checkpoints. But ultimately I think the companies with one are watching more closely, and the payoff for them is greater.
(17)
(0)