As usual, I request that this ONE topic be kept free of insults, short-term price forecasts and similar contentious stuff.
I missed a few minutes in the middle of the Q&A. My impressions of highlights:
Well, a lowlight first: they seem to be hardening into a pattern of saying that there is about to be something good coming out that they can't give specifics for right now. TERRIBLE HORRIBLE habit to get into. Maybe do it once every other year. I don't want to hear that '110 looks more interesting than expected. I don't want to hear that there's something to say about ruxo and marrow structure. When you're talking pipeline, don't just say that there's stuff you may be able to talk about soon. [takes a couple deep breaths]
I LOVE the free titration doses thing. Yea, as an analyst said it COULD be seen as a 2 week free sample, but that's not so bad either.
Definitely got the impression that they'd been over the PML case with FDA and were told not to comment on likely degree of association. That isn't as good as could be hoped for, but there's no sign that FDA is treating it as alarming, either.
Presentation quality is important for Incyte. This one was just adequate. The presenters didn't get rattled, but they didn't seem well prepared, either.
Putting all that in writing, I guess I have to call it a so-so CC reporting a good (maybe even very good) quarter.
Rachel McMinn is out with her evaluation. As always, 1)She combines the actual CC with intelligence gathering and 2)I won't re-post copyrighted material.
She thinks the evolution of the Jakafi label is going to be mostly positive, with dose selection and adjustment getting some detail, and with the PML event merely included in a laundry list.
She assigns a high enough probability to success vs PC to give it a separate entry in her valuation model. She reports that the PV opportunity appears larger than the MF opportunity.
Yeah, I heard stuff bearing on those issues, but clearly she heard more and her track record as a reporter is spotless (she's a pretty good analyst too, but being the brightest Keystone Kop is not the proudest claim)
Wish I had more to say. Results were good, but not spectacularly so. Some biggish stuff happening by EOY, but we knew that already, and they can't give us hints (well, they did specify the futility criterion that the PC trial used, and it was a stiff one as such things go) I had also hoped for a bit more color on Jakavi approvals, but the big countries of Europe are politically so screwed up that all it could be is a wish, not an expectation (I more-and-more appreciate the German approach of having EU-approved drugs available and reimbursed during consideration of national policy--people can get drugs while the government bloviates, and there's a motivation to get on with the decisions).