$SAN $SNY sees limited opportunity for flu/COVID vaccine combo as fo now
"mRNA safety profile unfit for flu market", I think I agree with that, except maybe for the elderlies?
other hurdles for mRNA for flu market
VE vs imminogenicity for various flu vaccine candidates
like all the other mRNA players, $SAN $SNY pivoted to modified mRNA
$TBIO $SAN $SNY mRNA COVID vaccine phase 1
..."Tolerability profile in line with other unmodified
mRNA COVID-19 vaccines" (ie horrible with >50% Gr3 AEs at both doses for 45mg)... $CVAC $GSK
T. Triomphe, Head of $SAN $SNY vaccines, says the opportunity in COVID for the company's vaccine is limited. "Pre-orders for 2022-mid'23 are already placed. If the data are positive, it would just be a complement".
flu clinicam data so far with unmodif mRNA
pivot to modified mRNA from unmodified mRNA with clear improvement on reacto while keeping same levels of immunogenicity (not sure same constructs referred to in last 2 slides)
also LNP improvements exhibited
*clinical*
$SAN $SNY about lyophilized mRNA vaccines (data of lyophilized $PFE $BNTX bnt162b2/Comirnary are still due)
I find interesting that $SAN $SNY tries to really make efforts to align the properties of their future mRNA vaccines -esp. on reacto- while other players are just assuming that if we accepted a worse tol profile for COVID, then we would also accept the same for flu or flu/COVID
combos. I am not sure at all that this latter approach is the good one.
$SAN $SNY also says that late strain selection is not the solution to improve the flu vaccine efficacy. This is marketed as an advantage to prevent mismatch thx to shorter dev. of mRNA vaccines vs more common approaches.
$SAN $SNY view on post pandemic market in COVID: "up to 500m doses", estimates based on the size of flu mkt size, it would depend on what would be the severity of COVID by 2024+, what are the recommendations for regular boosters (65+ or comobidities driven), & freq of boosters
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
EMA status on last Friday: 142 cases in April out of 17m doses w/ $AZN vaccine➡️316 at the end of May = 174 new cases out of 19m add. -first- doses of 1st doses in the EEA, i.e. stable
rate, but↘️in fatal events (deemed related to the awareness work of the agency)
Weird not to have seen a decrease, as most of the countries had spared the youngest pop. to receive the $AZN vaccine. Or maybe it's due to a delay in reporting of the AEs, and the late implementation of some restrictions?
$MOR finally pulling the trigger on M&A, putting cash from Bonds to work on this $CNST acquisition, with the assist of Royalty Pharma to increase the range of accessible M&A targets. BET & EZH2 inhibitors indeed seem to be relevant target to $MOR positioning. Had to do tradeoffs
Debate on potential for single dose in the UK. Which is aligned with a thought I previously shared. You cannot do it just like that but at least it deserves some second thoughts.
There's also this mention of the rigid "by age" strategy for vaccination, which I agree with. After the most vulnerable and the 60-65+, I also thought at vaccinating the population of potential super-spreaders, i.e. 18-25y or 18-30y (or 16-25y/16-30y), then going downwards from
60-65y. In the medium term, I guess it would make more sense to do that than doing the 18-25/18-30y at the end.
$LYS +32% in Paris trading this morning, with a press release worded like the "highly stat. sig." mean change in CSF HS concentration was saying it all, but unfortunately that's not really the case.
Directionally the variation seems OK, but 1/ p-values don't provide any magnitude
of an effect by themselves (unless you reverse some other data), and 2/ one also needs to take into account where the bar is ideally.
On point #1, Abeona already provided data with "highly stat. sig." (assuming this measn "p-val in the range of ~0.001 vs baseline") according to
rapid calculations (60-80% reductions obsverved across cohorts with ABO-102 at 6-12mo) & data/charts available on HS in CSF of MPS IIIa patients. However, coming to point #2, when one looks at the HS in CSF in MPS IIIa vs control, one would ideally need to see reductions >= ~90%.