Analysts are not impressed . They should be | PTLA Message Board Posts

Portola Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

  PTLA website

PTLA   /  Message Board  /  Read Message

 

 






Keyword
Subject
Between
and
Rec'd By
Authored By
Minimum Recs
  
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board
Msg  6579 of 6623  at  11/8/2019 12:03:52 PM  by

erniewerner


 In response to msg 6578 by  theriver
view thread

Re: Analysts are not impressed . They should be

 "I'd be interested in finding out what the KOLs say about it on the investment day, what they're seeing in the real world. But, I bet they'll be singing the praises of Andexxa."
 
I think they are going to be careful enough about who they invite to speak that a negative review from an invited speaker is not very likely.  A few things I want to hear about regarding real world use.
1.  Are practitioners using a diagnostic blood test to guide necessity for A use and determine high vs low dose usage.  If they are, how long from admittance to treatment?
2.  When A was first rolled out there was a lot of grumbling about the high cost, the lack of availability until gen 2 came on line, and the lack of a RCT for approval.  Has time and experience improved the drug's reputation at large?
3.  Growth depends on adding hospitals and increased used by hospitals already stocking the drug.  Back of the envelope says that in the 3rd quarter, on average, hospitals each used the drug twice.  Looking at the hospitals that were early adopters, how much have those with the most experience increased their use of the drug over time?
4.  I'd also like a phase 4 update.
 
Following is the detailed description from the clinicaltrials.gov website
 
Detailed Description:
This is a randomized, multicenter clinical trial designed to determine the efficacy and safety of andexanet compared to usual care in patients presenting with acute intracranial hemorrhage within 12 hours of symptom onset and within 15 hours of taking an oral factor Xa inhibitor. The study will use a prospective, randomized, open label (PROBE) design. The primary efficacy outcome will be adjudicated by a blinded Endpoint Adjudication Committee. To support the adjudication of hemostatic efficacy, a blinded Imaging Core Laboratory will review all available scans. Approximately 440 patients are planned to be enrolled in the study.
 
So how does this work?  I assume there is a treatment arm (Andexanet) and a control arm (usual care).  Is the randomization 1:1?  Is there a planned interim?  A lot rides on the outcome.  A positive result pretty much guarantees universal adoption for ICH treatment and a negative or marginal result could crush sales and even threaten the approval.  I still own the stock, so obviously I expect a positive outcome, but I still worry about it.


     e-mail to a friend      printer-friendly     add to library      
| More
Recs: 6     Views: 395
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board

Replies
Msg # Subject Author Recs Date Posted
6580 Re: Analysts are not impressed . They should be theriver 4 11/8/2019 1:45:37 PM






About Us  •  Contact Us  •  Follow Us on Twitter  •  Members Directory  •  Help Center  •  Advertise
Not a member yet? What are you waiting for? Create Account
Want to contribute? Support InvestorVillage by donating
© 2003-2019 Investorvillage.com. All rights reserved. User Agreement
   
Financial Market Data provided by
.


Loading...