Victrelis

Quote
Anonymous said:
I do love how one disgruntled, miserable person posts several times to try to make us believe that the entire Roche field force is so up in arms about this deal. I, for one, don't buy it.
Click to expand...

Sorry Todd...but get your fat head out of the office and take a listen around the entire COUNTRY! If people say they're happy about this, they say it because they're up your ass comfortably living. Genentech is NOT happy either. I'm beginning to believe that this 2 year deal has something much more behind it....say Genentech taking over the entire division from Merck, grabbing HCV drug development, and imploding the Merck sales force. You said it yourself Toad, Merck has no confidence in the sales force.
 






Anonymous said:
Sorry Todd...but get your fat head out of the office and take a listen around the entire COUNTRY! If people say they're happy about this, they say it because they're up your ass comfortably living. Genentech is NOT happy either. I'm beginning to believe that this 2 year deal has something much more behind it....say Genentech taking over the entire division from Merck, grabbing HCV drug development, and imploding the Merck sales force. You said it yourself Toad, Merck has no confidence in the sales force.
Click to expand...

I'm just happy that I'm not friends with anyone that is this bitter and miserable. Someone must know who this is. If they are this miserable on CP then they are miserable about everything else in their life
 






Anonymous said:
This is a PERFECT example of why Roche/Genentech continues to kick your ass! "So Dr., I'm here to promote the new PI. And just to let you know, our delta difference is .02 percent better than Vertex. Now isn't that important to tell your patients? Never mind that 79% SVR is the highest in the marketplace, our delta is greater! And yes, we used PegIntron as our peg of choice because it has less than a 20% market share!"

PLEASE GOD....I can't work with these douchebags!!!!!!
Click to expand...

You are really retarded. The 79% means the improvement over the STANDARD OF CARE- is a 28-30% higher SVR. Telaprevir doesn't get to 79% without 2 other drugs in the regimen and you have to look at the DELTA change. OMG seriously good luck if that's what you think. Maybe you even think the FDA didn't pull out a class effect of ANEMIA in Telaprevir. Both drugs have the SAME delta over Standard of CARE- peg/rbv and BOTH drugs have ANEMIA... Pull your head out of ASS.
 






Anonymous said:
Sorry Todd...but get your fat head out of the office and take a listen around the entire COUNTRY! If people say they're happy about this, they say it because they're up your ass comfortably living. Genentech is NOT happy either. I'm beginning to believe that this 2 year deal has something much more behind it....say Genentech taking over the entire division from Merck, grabbing HCV drug development, and imploding the Merck sales force. You said it yourself Toad, Merck has no confidence in the sales force.
Click to expand...

Genentech seems fine with the co-promote. I talked to my Roche/Genentech rep yesterday. They are happy to help out and happy to have something new. They are also primarily focused on Pegasys, but they aren't disgruntled why would they be? Todd may not get along with a few reps and managers, but that is life- not everyone gets along. Personally, I think Todd has been doing a great job and pulling together an improved marketing, sales management team from what we have been used to in the past. Enjoy the happy times. Anyone can buy out a division... maybe we'll continue co-promoting the HCV treatments together with Genentech, maybe we'll get bought out. Either way, there are many HCV drugs in the pipeline and there is a lot of talk about BMS, BI, and other companies with improved HCV drugs without Peg/RBV...
 






It is clear that Merck and Roche having some form of a deal concerning HCV will already raise the spectre of collusion to corner the market for one portion of the SOC, pegylated interferon. The promotion deal may be a taunt to see if Vertex rises to the bait to call in the feds to investigate when in fact it might only be for ensuring that Roche does not actively distribute sales material for telaprevir and thereby exclude boceprevir. There is absolutely no chance that one or the other company will solely promote these therapies to by the agreement of both and to the exclusion of one or the other. Once telaprevir is appproved, look ot see if Vertex will enter in some marketing agreement with Roche to distribute information to their contacts just like Merck did.
 






Anonymous said:
You are really retarded. The 79% means the improvement over the STANDARD OF CARE- is a 28-30% higher SVR. Telaprevir doesn't get to 79% without 2 other drugs in the regimen and you have to look at the DELTA change. OMG seriously good luck if that's what you think. Maybe you even think the FDA didn't pull out a class effect of ANEMIA in Telaprevir. Both drugs have the SAME delta over Standard of CARE- peg/rbv and BOTH drugs have ANEMIA... Pull your head out of ASS.
Click to expand...

Ask a patient if they care about the delta difference or a 79% SVR over a 63% SVR. If you look at Pegasys trials, you will see that the control arm is consistent in what you see in other Pegasys trials. Merck had higher rates in the control arm in the Pegasys BVR trial is well.
 






No offense meant to Victrelis but if I had HCV, I would put my money on Pegasys and telaprevir based on the numbers that have been published. For now, that combination has not been topped by PegIntron plus boceprevir. And I wouldn't give a damn what my doctor or his sales might recommend to the contrary.
 












The importance and effect of the Pharma sales force is most crucial during a launch. I've heard one Sr. Manager say that launch is the only time a sales force is worth the cost.

This is a great move in my opinion. The Roche, SP (Merck) reps have been competing for a long time. I hope they can work together because the success of this drug (and your compensation) depends on it.

Would you rather have Roche helping sell the product, or a contract team from Innovex?

Vertex has a good drug, by most accounts better. The rash could be a serious issue however. There are plenty of drugs were efficacy is trumped by side effects (look at ACE v. ARB in HBP).

Either way, good for patients and Hep reps.
 






Anonymous said:
Ya you're right. who cares what their doctor might think or recommend. r*****
Click to expand...

The collaboration of pharmaceutical sales and doctors has resulted in some, but not all and one hopes not most, doctors being little better than the fabled car mechanic with respect to recommending therapies that will make the most money for the doctor. When ones life is on the line, whether Hep C or surgery, it pays to educate yourself about the choices and to get second opinions. It just isn't that hard to find the actual data on Hep C. Today, sadly, one sure as hell ought not trust the stereotypical pharma sales rep's (Vertex or Merck or Roche) personal recommendation. Pharma companies have managed to get themselves way down the list of most trusted and they only have themselves to blame. Scrupulous doctors and medical centers are afraid to taint themsleves by means of continuing some of the more disreputable sales relationships of the last 10-15 years. Hep C is likely to apply some of the patient advocacy information sharing that has characterized HIV care. This aggressive patient involvement (as opposed to just blindly following what doctors and pharmas offer) has probably improved the care of HIV overall.
 












Anonymous said:
The better product is the one that has the safety and efficacy. Is shorter treatment worth it when there is rash, anemia and discontiuation rates that are high. Then I guess pushing a treatment that doesn't work for the majority of patients is why Genentech chose to copromote with the better drug. All the studies with Telaprevir were done with Pegasys and Genetech chose Merck because Victrelis is a better drug in the long run for patients- they make it through treatment and they don't have rash clinics.
Click to expand...

But pumping patients full of EPO is the other option?? Don't minimize anemia/Hg decline with Victrelis. Don't think that payers are going to step up to cover EPO as another aspect of treatment, that is still controversial. Ultimately, MDs will use what they feel is safest and best for the patient. They can read between the lines and figure out what is best. Let's see where the market is in 2 years post launch.
 












OK folks, here is the reality check. This is 1996 all over again. The first HIV PIs are approved (Crixivan and Invirase) - both have tough dosing schedules, lots of pills and side effects. What we're dealing with now is this situation all over except that it is for a finite period of tx, they still have to take PR with it and many of the patients that are going to go on these first are the relapsers, partial responders and nulls. Let's make the most of the next 2 - 4 years because after that, the 2nd generation meds will be popping up and today's SOC (not PR) will be a thing of the past. Hopefully we are still in play with the next generation of meds also coming from our labs
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote