RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Forecasting next 5 Quarters FWIW, and I was the first here to harp on the NASH possibilities, I have a contact who has a solid scientific background and was in on the ground floor on MDGL.
Anyway, he believes that “
there should be an overlap in ultimate liver gene expression profiles modulated by growth hormone and thyroid hormone effects on intrinsic metabolic pathways.” Therefore, we can expect some significant data in my mind.
I would hope they would license this program and collect a nice upfront cheque with which to buy new drugs.
bfw
SPCEO1 wrote: No offence taken and guilty as charged. But that is why having multiple good contributors to this board, of which you are obviously one, makes it so worthwhile to be part of. I am pretty hard to offend in any event. One of my ventures is something called MinistryWatch.com where we highlight the good and bad of what goes on among Christian minsitries in the US so donors to those minsitries can make wise decisions about where to give their money. As you might imagine, one needs a pretty htick skin to take on the bad guys who are more than happy to do what they can to discredit me and our work there.
It defintely could turn out to just be a way to increase the saels of Egrifta and nothing more but we have a free option on the better scenarios, so none of us are going to lose no matter how it turns out. And we will know, or at least know more, soon enough since the data will come out before the end of February according to TH.
jfm1330 wrote: No doubt you are in my view the best contributor here, so don't feel offended by my remark, but the only downside is that you have a tendency to be overoptimistic at times? I think this NASH thing is one of these times. I hope I am wrong and you are right, but either ways, I don't think this will have any impact on the SP in the next few years unless the phase II results would really be spectacular.
SPCEO1 wrote: If your pessimism on Egrifta for NASH is accurate, don't you wonder why it is all of a sudden in the corporate presentation? Why would they highlight this is they believe as you do about its prospects? That would be pretty strange behavior, right? Certainly out of character for TH. So, think on that for a while and see if you can come up with an explanation for why the company would roll this into their corporate presentation now just a couple o months before the data is released after ignoring it for years. They must have some sort of plan. I have previously highlighted three options but I am sure the company knows more and you actually alluded to ways in which they might move forward that are not included in the three options I mentioned in an earlier post, which are:
1.) The long shot, grand slam home run option which is to seek fast FDA approval for Egfita in NASH as a label extension from the current approval for lipodystrophy based on great phase II results (hopefully) and the long track record of safety for Egrfita.
2.) Seek European approval only and get access to NASH and likely lipodystrophy there for 10 years.I also disagree that they would not invest big money in a NASH Europe indication as I am pretty sure the NPV of that would be positive for shareholders. NASH is viewed as a $20 billion marekt in the US and it would be pretty gigantic in Europe as well.
3.) The low end of expectations is just being able to increase the lipodystophy market significantly in the US by getting word out among the doctors that it helps with the more prevalent NASH condition as well as lipodystrophy. Probably 30% of lipodystrophy patients have NASH as well.
I am sure there are a multitude of other options that I am not aware of. Indeed you highlighted some. Another might be to pursue the European NASH amrket on their own but sell the rights to Egrfita in NASH to a generic company in the US. I am sure there are all kinds of things that could be potnetially massaged to make this a legitmate opportunity for TH and I am also sure I don't have the knowledge base to figure them out. But the company does and Luc is really good at this kind of thing. Just look at what he hss done with Egrfita so far. And, as I said, I can't believe they are suddenly including this long dormant issue in their coroprate presentation unless they have already thought out how it might benefit shareholders.
Also, if the NASH data is very good, that is soimething management should consider changing the identity of the company over. NASH is a very big deal and it would make Trogarzo look like a small drug in comparison.
Finally, I don't remember the cancer concerns you mentioned, but that might be just because I am over 50 now. But, there has been no indication such concerns were valid and Egrifta has been in use a very long time now. I doubt that would be an impediment.