Sun, Dec 28, 2014, 11:00 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

onlyfactsplease 153 posts  |  Last Activity: Dec 24, 2014 9:38 AM Member since: Oct 9, 2009
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Otsuka / Concert relationship

    by jtl_bhc Dec 22, 2014 7:18 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 24, 2014 9:38 AM Flag

    I can see that jtl replied but it's not showing up...at least for me.

    You can see all their patents on the website under "Intellectual Property Summary "...the 3 jtl listed are in there

  • Reply to

    diabetic nephropathy

    by tblew Dec 20, 2014 4:08 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 22, 2014 4:36 PM Flag

    Sorry...that was a typo. It was definitely significant at p=0.0148.

    The 2 drugs may mesh well...one for a more rapid effect, the other for a more long term effect, maybe in combination also a synergistic effect given the differing mechanisms. It will be interesting to see unfold.

  • Reply to

    diabetic nephropathy

    by tblew Dec 20, 2014 4:08 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 22, 2014 12:54 PM Flag

    tblew, I'm hoping to pick your thoughts a bit more on the relative nephropathy results for CCXI and CNCE. At first I was a bit discouraged by the comparison but I think you've hit on some very important points. Do you have access to any of the data that was not in the respective press releases?

    Initially I was disappointed that CNCE did not reach statistical significance for their primary measure (UACR at 24 weeks) whereas CCXI did reach significance for that at p=0.148. The number of patients in the CCXI study was about double that in the CNCE study so we'd expect that what is only a trend for CNCE could easily be SS for CCXI. CCXI doesn't give insight in their press release as to the extent of the reduction in the first 6 months of their study but neither does CNCE. At a year, CTP-499 treated patients had an increase of UACR of 24 mg/g whereas placebo patients had a 223 mg/g increase (p=0.097). Again, no specific numbers available for CCXI but they do note that their reduction in UACR was maximal at 12 weeks and "sustained" for a year RELATIVE TO SOC. The phrase "relative to SOC" suggests to me that there was not an absolute reduction and as such it's unlikely that they would have significantly beaten CTP-499's 24 mg/g increase and could easily have shown far worse results for sustained reductions.

    Your point about different mechanisms of action is also well-taken. CCX140 targets the inflammatory response whereas CTP-499 targets fibrosis. These mechanisms also fit well with the above narratives that CCX140's effects are more rapid (maximal at 12 weeks) whereas CTP-499's effects are longer term and (at least initially) probably best targeted to the higher baseline UACR-enriched group of patients.

    Finally, CNCE reports results in terms of serum creatinine while CCXI reports in terms of eGFR. These measures are inversely related and comparisons can be made using a number of approximation formulae but I was unsuccessful. Anyone able to?

  • Reply to

    diabetic neuropathy

    by tblew Dec 20, 2014 10:41 AM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 20, 2014 1:57 PM Flag

    Thanks tblew

    You may not have noticed, and some newer readers might be confused, but you wrote diabetic "neuropathy" when you meant to write nephropathy.

  • Reply to

    'Outside the box' thoughts

    by jtl_bhc Dec 19, 2014 2:51 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 19, 2014 3:48 PM Flag

    I think there's a distinction between dropping the collaboration and freezing development. I don't recall the specifics but AVNR paid a lot to CNCE for the rights and I don't think they'd ever have to give it back even if they don't progress in the development of AVP786.

    That being said, AVNR and their buyer have very good reasons to develop AVP786 - patent expiration, risk of competition, safety, and dosing flexibility all come to mind.

  • Reply to

    Congoisking (tradestoxx) down $400,000 on NQ

    by fku_imbecile Dec 19, 2014 8:45 AM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 19, 2014 10:00 AM Flag

    The best was when he purported averaged down so much on ALU that he had 175% of his portfolio in it. I don't think he understands that lies and mathematics don't mix well.

  • Reply to

    nice move up this morning

    by spook2b Dec 17, 2014 9:43 AM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 17, 2014 10:03 AM Flag

    Wow!!...a Party, I mean Party a sounds great!

  • Reply to

    Reminder....

    by congoclaus Dec 15, 2014 1:19 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 15, 2014 7:17 PM Flag

    It's only useless if your expectation is for logic or rational discussion.

    TS/Congo interactions are for entertainment purposes only...though I do understand many do not find the humor in his antics so I try to indulge only sparingly.

  • Reply to

    Reminder....

    by congoclaus Dec 15, 2014 1:19 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 15, 2014 5:13 PM Flag

    Stop trying to gain credibility by bringing me in to your posts.

    It wasn't so much that I agreed with you on the number of patients...it was more you FINALLY agreed with me on that quite simple point. I taught you years before how to estimate how many patients were on N. You chose not to listen so when you finally figured it out, it had been long-baked into the pps. That and your fallacies came crashing down just as other developments took off ("looking left when you should be looking right"). That timing was particularly unfortunate for you.

  • Reply to

    Question for OTF

    by brian.196610 Dec 9, 2014 11:00 AM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 12, 2014 8:39 AM Flag

    That's a copied and pasted post I made on the AVNR board a few weeks ago and the numbers are outdated...AVNR's market cap is the same but CNCE's is lower making the comparisons even more favorable.

  • Reply to

    Question for OTF

    by brian.196610 Dec 9, 2014 11:00 AM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 12, 2014 8:37 AM Flag

    Hi tblew,
    AVNR has revenues but prospects for profits in the next few years are slim. CNCE, otoh, has no significant costs related to avp-786 and AVNR is pretty much staking its future on it..

    AVNR plans to shift all future clinical trials to AVP-786. In addition to milestones, Concert Pharmaceuticals (CNCE) will get royalties on all eventual AVP-786 sales in the high single to low double-digit % range. They have essentially no development costs and they will not have any marketing or other costs once AVP-786 launches.

    AVNR’s market cap is valued at $3500M while Concert’s market cap is $231M (or 6.6% of AVNR’s). If we pull each company’s net cash out of that market cap it is ~$3325M and $150M (4.5% of AVNR). Since CNCE will get ~8% of AVNR’s income with essentially 100% margins I’d think they should have a market cap well above 8% of AVNR’s. Alas, it is not so.

    AVNR assets outside the above simplistic valuation:
    Ongoing Nuedexta revenues and Optinose

    CNCE assets outside the above simplistic valuation:
    A pipeline with large number of early-stage compounds and a drug discovery platform (based on deuteration) that will continue to pump out candidates.

    Risks:
    AVNR could dump AVP-786 – unlikely given the management team stays the same
    FDA could disallow 786 for it’s planned use in the PIII agitation trial – seems unlikely given they allowed it in the depression trial and it’s PK that closely matches 923.
    AVP-786 may not perform as well as AVP-923 – no indications as to why that would be the case

  • Reply to

    Question for OTF

    by brian.196610 Dec 9, 2014 11:00 AM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 10, 2014 6:38 AM Flag

    Thanks Biobetter...I had read that portion of the transcript but I don't read it as them saying the half-life is too long just that it's one of a number of possible problems. The questioner asked if a too-long half life could be a problem (among other possible problems) and Tobias answered that a too-long half life would be the first problem that would come to mind (among other possible problems) but he was speaking in the hypothetical ("IF") and by my reading they made no comments about the actual data specific to 386.

    Maybe testing a higher dose means it's not too long, maybe even shorter than ideal?

  • Reply to

    Question for OTF

    by brian.196610 Dec 9, 2014 11:00 AM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 9, 2014 8:20 PM Flag

    Hi Brian,
    My enthusiasm for CNCE is mostly based on relative valuation to AVNR. If AVNR is worth $17 then there's no way CNCE should be less than $17. As a result, I'm still catching up on the rest of the pipeline and I'll give some thoughts, but consider in the context above.

    Phase I testing is for pharmacokinetics/dyamics and safety in normal subjects so if they want to test a higher dose they must not be too concerned about safety from the original data. The rumor here is the half-life was too long (I can't find the source of this information). However, if the half life is too long they would tend toward lower not higher doses so I'm not sure why'd they'd bother testing higher doses if that's the case. If anyone can enlighten me further as to the known half-life data I'd greatly appreciate it.

    I have no idea what a "technical dosing issue" would be. Is this an excuse for something else?...can't figure out what that would be but at least they are hoping to move ahead. Did they just screw it up?...can't say that's all that encouraging but seems like that could be the case.

  • Reply to

    OFP

    by horcents Dec 7, 2014 1:56 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 8, 2014 10:03 AM Flag

    Looks very interesting...but I couldn't say any more than that without a much deeper understanding.

  • onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 4, 2014 10:51 AM Flag

    Thanks for "chirping in" Falconi...food for thought is all it's meant to be. The risks are real/substantial so I don't want to seem to be pumping but I do like the risk/reward ratio.

  • Reply to

    Investor relations is now unresponsive

    by beepeeess Dec 1, 2014 3:53 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 4, 2014 9:43 AM Flag

    They do own the rights....and I was wondering the same thing after the secondary. I'm sure they considered buying CNCE or at least buying out the 786 rights individually (to eliminate the milestone and royalties)...now it's Otsuka's turn to consider.

  • onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 3, 2014 8:39 PM Flag

    Thanks Horcents...I don't have much novel to add on suitors and I'm no expert on the whole buy out sequence so I'm mostly just watching and learning.

    I do think CNCE will be in Otsuka's sights...but they won't move until they know that outside suitors for AVNR are no longer possible.

    Hope we do get some suitors because I think KK and company potentially took care of themselves at our expense.

  • Reply to

    Unacceptable :0(

    by beepeeess Dec 3, 2014 4:52 PM
    onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 3, 2014 7:16 PM Flag

    Suspect this had something to do with it: " Otsuka Pharmaceuticals announced on Tuesday that it will acquire Avanir for $3.5 billion or $17 per share. Young believes that this represents a “fair” price for Avanir given the risks involving heading in to the end of Ph2 meeting.

    “There is a risk of the FDA not allowing Avanir to use the deuterated form of the compound, AVP-786, in Ph3 instead of AVP-923 which was used in Ph3,” Young wrote. “The patent for AVP-786 versus AVP-923 is four years longer in the U.S. (2030 versus 2026) and five years longer ex-U.S. (2028 versus 2023.)”

    I don't see the FDA not allowing it...but I can see them saying that a larger study is needed in which both AVP923 AND AVP786 are tested.

  • onlyfactsplease onlyfactsplease Dec 3, 2014 6:45 PM Flag

    I should add that if Otsuka probably is doing their own valuation of CNCE and if they come to anywhere near a similar conclusion we may see some quick action.

  • Still want to bet on the success of AVNR’s PBA, agitation, depression, LID, autism, and other dextromethorphan-related endeavors? There is a way to do it.

    As pretty much everyone here knows, AVNR plans to shift all future clinical trials to AVP-786. In addition to milestones, Concert Pharmaceuticals (CNCE) will get royalties on all eventual AVP-786 sales in the high single to low double-digit % range. They have essentially no development costs and they will not have any marketing or other costs once AVP-786 launches.

    AVNR’s market cap is valued at $3500M while Concert’s market cap is $231M (or 6.6% of AVNR’s). If we pull each company’s net cash out of that market cap it is ~$3325M and $150M (4.5% of AVNR). Since CNCE will get ~8% of AVNR’s income with essentially 100% margins I’d think they should have a market cap well above 8% of AVNR’s. Alas, it is not so.

    AVNR assets outside the above simplistic valuation:
    Ongoing Nuedexta revenues and Optinose

    CNCE assets outside the above simplistic valuation:
    A pipeline with large number of early-stage compounds and a drug discovery platform (based on deuteration) that will continue to pump out candidates.

    Risks:
    AVNR could dump AVP-786 – unlikely given the management team stays the same
    FDA could disallow 786 for it’s planned use in the PIII agitation trial – seems unlikely given they allowed it in the depression trial and it’s PK that closely matches 923.
    AVP-786 may not perform as well as AVP-923 – no indications as to why that would be the case

    Anyway, CNCE is my vote for migration of the AVNR community.

IRWD
14.95+0.38(+2.61%)Dec 26 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
PG&E Corporation
NYSEFri, Dec 26, 2014 4:02 PM EST
Rice Energy Inc.
NYSEFri, Dec 26, 2014 4:02 PM EST