It's efficacious enough, or would be if Avastin was less of a hot-button product for Roche. Probably the most marketable of the candidates in-house. Again, if I was Mr Roche, I'd want it.
Really REALLY depressing CC. Management sounds AT LEAST as liquidationist as anyone on this board. I've said it a jillion times: to develop new drugs Ya Gotta Believe!! And they don't, or don't sound like it.
Expected movement forward in the anti-cancer programs. Too early to tell much, and they can't afford to pursue both of them properly. Best news was on the anti-interferon. They have a primary candidate. That might be enough to get some sort of a deal for it. Shame to have to negotiate with a knife at the throat.
No! We don't gotta believe. This is not a religion, this is a public for-profit company, not a charity. You have to run a public company for shareholders. From the cc I see no real progress on any front, and how many millions spent? Some of us invested real money (not stock awards). Did you notice that no questions allowed at the end of the call? Cowards!
YOU don't gotta believe because YOU have no interest in developing drugs. There are big rewards (I personally know a professor who sponsored a new lab building for his department on the back of ONE medium-popular drug he developed) for success in drug development, but the only way to get there is to do more work than you thought you were signing up for and to keep going when it seems like every idiotic obstacle ever dreamed up is getting in the way of your shining lead. The other side of that, of course, is that most of the time you fail anyway. It's like playing a draw in poker.
Hey Jacosa I do not understand what were the grounds for halting Azixa. Management has not justified the decision. They seem to basically have dismissed the program to focus on "more promising" programs. Given their silence regarding their intentions with Azixa (or any hint that there may still be value in Azixa) what makes you think that they will license or sell the compound? Also, since you listened to CC, will Lollini remain as CEO or are they actually going to bring someone with a track record of developing and bringing to market drugs. Thanks for sharing your views!
Best guess: there were several grounds for the status of Azixa: 1) The cost to bring it to market grew larger than the pot of money available (Originally, it was supposed to get to market as a second-line drug against some relatively rare cancer involving the brain; basically, Avastin, with the clout of Roche behind it, got in the way of that. The numbers just didn't work to develop it as a first-line treatment). 2) The victorious board faction hate Hobden, and won't say anything nice in public about his pet candidate. 3) The company's business model is now to get candidates somewhere into phase 2 and then "monetize" them. Azixa is already there.
I consider the Azixa and anti-interferon programs the most marketable right now (as for the "What has been accomplished?" question in another thread, putting a specific compound at the head of the anti-interferon project is a key improvement in marketability).
I don't see any way the board would shift from liquidationist to success-oriented.