Gribbene i Merck vil ha mye for medisin utviklet med skattebetaleres penger.
1 Like
Hvordan tror du en evt parter av BGBIO vil prise BEM?
1 Like
Hvor mange år med forskning og studier ligger bak? Og investert kapital og risiko?
Vi snakker mange milliarder av kroner og ti tusentalls av timer.
Skattebetalerne, altså oss alle, betaler hele gildet uansett hva det gjelder. Medisin er intet unntak. Det er også vi som trenger det.
Vet ikke med deg, men jeg skal ha betalt for den risiko og tolmodighet jeg har eksponert meg for og lagt ned.
3 Likes
Har mistet all tro på BEM som COVID-medisin. Det beste for oss aksjonærene hadde vært om BGBIO umiddelbart avsluttet å bruke menneskelige ressurser og penger på dette, og rettet all innsats mot kreftbehandling og mindre pasientpopulasjoner med “high unmet medical need”.
BGBIO er rett og slett noen nummer for små til å kunne vinne i COVID-supplement-til-vaksine-racet.
Merck was criticized two decades ago for selling its H.I.V. drugs at prices unaffordable in Africa. This time, the company recognized the imperative of widening access early.
“We really did have a responsibility that, if this drug was found to be a safe and effective oral drug that someone could take at home, we need to make sure that, especially in low- and middle-income countries where they don’t have the strongest health care systems, that this would have very wide access,” said Jenelle Krishnamoorthy, Merck’s vice president for global policy.
The voluntary licenses the company negotiated with the Indian drugmakers offer the possibility that governments in the poorest nations could buy molnupiravir for well under $20 per five-day course, compared with $712 in the U.S. deal.
The eight Indian companies are in clinical trials with their versions of the drug, and four confirmed to The Times that they expected to release results soon; one industry executive who was not authorized to speak on the record said he expected his firm to produce the drug for less than $10 per course.
9 Likes
Atea Pharma Stock Plunges 76% After Covid Pill Falls Short in Tests | Barron’s (barrons.com).
"Atea Pharma ceuticals, the company behind one of the most-watched oral Covid-19 antiviral programs, delivered a disappointing failure on Tuesday morning, saying the pill didn’t reduce the viral load of patients with mild or moderate cases in a Phase 2 trial.
The pill did reduce the viral load in a subgroup of high-risk patients. The company said that the overall patient population, in which the amount of virus wasn’t clearly reduced, was mostly made up of low-risk patients with mild symptoms.
Atea (ticker: AVIR) and its partner, Roche Holding (RHHBY), are now rethinking a continuing Phase 3 trial of the drug, known as AT-527, which began dosing patients in April. The company has now pushed back its expected completion date for that trial by a year, from the second half of 2021 to the second half of 2022.
Shares of Atea were down 75.8%, to $9.82, in premarket trading, after a brief halt. The stock has traded as high as $94.17 over the past 12 months.
Roche shares were down 2.2% on the Swiss exchange, while shares of Merck (MRK), which is developing a competing Covid-19 oral antiviral, were up 3.1%.
“We, along with our partner Roche, are continuing to advance multiple studies in parallel to provide further clinical evidence as well as outcome data to support AT-527 as an oral, potent, direct-acting antiviral treatment for COVID-19,” said the company’s chief development officer, Dr. Janet Hammond, in a statement.
Atea scheduled a conference call for investors for 8:30 a.m. Eastern.
Positive data on Merck’s Covid-19 antiviral, molnupiravir, shook up the market earlier this month, sparking a slide in shares of Covid-19 vaccine and monoclonal antibody developers.
The data on Merck’s molnupiravir and the new Atea data on AT-527 aren’t directly comparable. Molnupiravir’s data was from a later-stage Phase 3 trial of high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, measuring clinical outcomes. In that trial, the drug was shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization or death by 50% in an interim analysis.
Atea’s new results, meanwhile, are from a Phase 2 trial designed to measure changes in viral load. What is more, it included low-risk patients who had been vaccinated, unlike in the molnupiravir trial. Atea said that the average age of the patients in the trial was 37, and that two-thirds of the patients had mild symptoms and no underlying health conditions.
Interest in an effective oral treatment for Covid-19 has grown dramatically in recent months, as public health officials have grown increasingly convinced that the virus will present a long-term, endemic threat. None of the few treatments currently available for Covid-19 are delivered in pill form.
Public-health experts hope that a Covid-19 pill could be an affordable, convenient tool to reduce the human cost of the virus. On Tuesday morning, Reuters reported that a World Health Organization-led program expects to pay $10 per course for oral antivirals like molnupiravir. That would be sharply less than the U.S. is paying for molnupiravir under the terms of an agreement announced in June that appears to price the drug at around $700 per course.
Analysts have said a pill that could be easily distributed and could treat the virus in its early stages would be a megablockbuster for the company that develops it. Atea’s experimental pill was one of three highlighted by Barron’s in a September magazine feature, along with Merck’s, and another from Pfizer .
At the time, the company’s CEO, Jean-Pierre Sommadossi, highlighted A-527’s two-pronged attack against the virus. “Our drug, to our knowledge, is the only drug that has a dual mechanism,” Sommadossi told Barron’s.
Merck’s antiviral has raised safety concerns among some scientists who have studied the drug. As Barron’s reported in early October, molnupiravir works by incorporating itself into the genetic material of the virus that causes Covid-19, and then creating a huge number of mutations as the virus replicates, effectively killing it.
Lab tests by scientists at the University of North Carolina have shown that the drug can also integrate into the genetic material of mammalian cells and cause mutations as those cells replicate. If that were to happen in the cells of a patient, it could theoretically lead to cancer, though Meck says it has run extensive tests in animals that show this isn’t an issue.
Citi Research analyst Andrew Baum wrote last week that he doesn’t think the theoretical safety concerns will keep Merck’s drug from obtaining Food and Drug Administration authorization. Still, he said that if the Atea or Pifzer antivirals showed similar efficacy to molnupiravir, the safety worries could mean that Merck would lose market share to them.
“Despite reassurances around potential carcinogenicity risk, we do see some downside risk to current molnupiravir market expectations if either Roche or PFE antivirals show similar or superior efficacy in their ongoing phase III trials,” Baum wrote at the time.
Merck’s bump early Tuesday could reflect investors’ growing confidence that that won’t be an issue.
3 Likes
Men helt seriøst asså. Hva er det som holder igjen kursen i dette selskapet?
Er det due diligence som fører til denne stillheten?
• Tillit, Godfrey gjorde ikke annet enn å jazze opp stemningen, endte i skuffelse. Markedet straffer slikt.
• Cash
• D-risk -a’ oppstart fase III
En kan bare håpe ny CEO viser andre takter, walk the talk. Godfrey gjorde motsatt. Jazzet opp etterfulgt av massiv innside salg.
For egen del håper jeg det kommer bud på hele driten, 2m USD.
1 Like
Jeg skjønner ikke hvorfor ledelse/CEO er så passiv, spørsmålet er om det er en årsak til det, eller en " ny strategi "
Hvor lenge til neste emisjon? Hvor lenge holder det med snitt cashburn i 2021?
Rart at det ikke blir registrert siste handel på 4K aksjer på 20kr!
Mulig dette er årsaken
Investech anbefaler salg av 3 aksjer i E24, BGBIO er en av disse, og aksjen svarer med å stige 1,5% 
4 Likes
Har Investtech noensinne vært annet enn negative ref. BGBIO? Synes selskapet konstant er på “ligg unna”- eller “selg”-lista der
Rart det der, med tanke på kursutvikling. Fra et teknisk perspektiv er denne aksjen 100%boss.
1 Like
Norda gikk fra 0 til 350k, og jeg tror du tar 100% feil i at dette er en long-posisjon.
1 Like
Klarte ikke å tolke dette annerledes jeg?
1 Like
Tror du misforstår - jeg snakker om en long/short dikotomi, ikke om langsiktigheten til Norda ASA.
Men for å være helt klar: Jeg er ganske så overbevist om at de 350k aksjer som Norda ASA nå vises med, er starten på en ganske saftig shortposisjon.
1 Like
Fordi man ikke har kjøpt dem - man har lånt dem.