9-12-13 Ron Bentsur KERX CEO stated "We -- I'll take that one step further. If I understand your question correctly. We actually think -- so the reduction of IV iron use in the Zerenex group versus the active control group in the long term Phase III study was about 52%. We think that in the real world, we can be eliminating the need for IV iron and the majority of the patients, not all of them, but certainly the majority of the patients who are going to be on Zerenex are not going to need IV iron, simply because the drug maintains [indiscernible] after desirable levels and if you know what's going on in dialysis, IV iron usage, the protocols are triggered by TSAT and ferritin threshold. So, if you can keep patients above those thresholds, you don't need to dose IV iron, it's as simple as that. And we feel, again in the real world, the reality is that; we're going to be able to eliminate the IV iron in the majority of the patients."
Listen closely to the last 2 presentations. Listen closely as to what conditions have to exist before ESA's and IV iron is prescribed. Anemia occurs because of blood loss during dialysis. Iron levels have to drop to a set level before iron is prescribed. With Z the iron levels are maintained and improve to where iron would not be needed thus a very limited market for SFP and if there is a need it will be short lived in the treatment plan. It looks like SFP is a superior solution for low iron but Im pretty certain the market is going to be much smaller than what many are thinking. Cant wait for the Ph2 readout mid Nov. It will give a better look at what to expect on several endpoints. TV
SFP is delivered during dialysis through the dialysate. Zerenex and SFP can co-exist, but Z sales will be multiples higher. SFP is only for dialysis patients, while Z is for dialysis and pre-dialysis, treating hyperphosphatemia and iron deficiency. Dual action. The two drugs are not really competitors in the same market.