Tdeank, I think even the shorts on this board (whether short-sellers or short-sighteds) can answer your rhetorical question. I’ll point this out. Eylea uses a VEGF-trap technology that works essentially the same as Genentech’s anti-VEGF mab (Lucentis). No significant difference on the patho-physiology of the illness. Eylea does offer one “small” advantage to the patient. With Lucentis you get an eyeball injection every month. With Eylea you get an injection every month for the first three months and then every 2 months after that.
Search “Lucentis duration of treatment” and you’ll see this on an independent ophthalmology site: “You may receive multiple Lucentis injections over the course of many months. Repeat treatments are often needed for continued benefit.”
Guess what? Patients like being able to go every two months instead of every month. If you’re a patient that’s a big advantage. And with that, Eylea captured a $billion of market share over night. They’ll continue to gain in the future as ophthalmologists elect (or are forced by their insurance companies and medical boards) to terminate off-label use of Avastin for this indication.
Imagine the impact of a product that cuts injection frequency to once a year or even one time only. We don’t yet know for sure that iSonep can reliably do that. But there sure was some tantalizing evidence in phase 1. Nexus results could prove very disruptive to this $10 billion market. And don't rule out an early read out.