|
Post by Clement on Sept 13, 2018 9:30:07 GMT -5
Do I understand this correctly? Now, our sales reps can tell this info to doctors. In the past, our reps were restricted to the label, and they could not talk about superiority. Now they can. So, this would indeed be a big deal.
Per Dr. Kendall: "The completion of this proof-of-concept trial and peer-reviewed publication allows for broad sharing of these data with diabetes healthcare professionals.”
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Sept 13, 2018 9:32:36 GMT -5
Would assume Mannkind gets to distribute reprints / synthesized versions to doctors / others. Someone else better informed care to comment? aged said that this particular journal has a low impact compared to diabetes care. Plus diabetes care is almost entirely freely accessible so it's easy for doctors to read.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Sept 13, 2018 9:33:42 GMT -5
$59 to read the full text?! It serves no purpose to publish this if you are going to require money to view the full text. I am disappointed. If someone has an account on liebertpub try logging in and see if the full text is accessible. Either way, I think I'll email Dr. Garg and asked him to uplift the public viewing fee. Liebert is open access. Is this requiring a fee because it is ahead of print or because the authors' didn't want to comply with open access? mango When I clicked on the original link just now, I believe I'm seeing the entire article without any request for a $59 fee. Perhaps something's been adjusted? Yup, it now shows as 'Free Access'.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Sept 13, 2018 9:39:58 GMT -5
$59 to read the full text?! It serves no purpose to publish this if you are going to require money to view the full text. I am disappointed. If someone has an account on liebertpub try logging in and see if the full text is accessible. Either way, I think I'll email Dr. Garg and asked him to uplift the public viewing fee. Liebert is open access. Is this requiring a fee because it is ahead of print or because the authors' didn't want to comply with open access? mango When I clicked on the original link just now, I believe I'm seeing the entire article without any request for a $59 fee. Perhaps something's been adjusted? Yep, looks like Dr. Garg owes me $59. I'll take it in MannKind shares please
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Sept 13, 2018 9:48:59 GMT -5
I'm curious.. do studies like this "move the needle"? What is their target audience? I assume Endo's read this more so than patients and as a result might consider 'making the switch' with a PWD to start them on Afrezza?
Yes it moves the needle. Today we are up a penny.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Sept 13, 2018 9:51:36 GMT -5
mango When I clicked on the original link just now, I believe I'm seeing the entire article without any request for a $59 fee. Perhaps something's been adjusted? Yup, it now shows as 'Free Access'. I see a creative commons symbol on there now too.
|
|
|
Post by centralcoastinvestor on Sept 13, 2018 9:53:28 GMT -5
The purpose of publishing in these kinds of publications is not for the sake of investors or the investment world. Dr. Kendall wants to make sure there is continuous data presented to the medical world. Dr. Kendall stated at the annual meeting that his intention was to continuously publish so that there is a vast library of proof of the effectiveness of Afrezza. This breadth of published data helps endocrinologists get over any reservations they might have. In the long term, this will drive Afrezza sales.
|
|
|
Post by joeypotsandpans on Sept 13, 2018 9:55:49 GMT -5
Do I understand this correctly? Now, our sales reps can tell this info to doctors. In the past, our reps were restricted to the label, and they could not talk about superiority. Now they can. So, this would indeed be a big deal. Per Dr. Kendall: "The completion of this proof-of-concept trial and peer-reviewed publication allows for broad sharing of these data with diabetes healthcare professionals.” "BINGO"!!
|
|
|
Post by mango on Sept 13, 2018 9:56:32 GMT -5
Do I understand this correctly? Now, our sales reps can tell this info to doctors. In the past, our reps were restricted to the label, and they could not talk about superiority. Now they can. So, this would indeed be a big deal. Per Dr. Kendall: "The completion of this proof-of-concept trial and peer-reviewed publication allows for broad sharing of these data with diabetes healthcare professionals.” Yep, all scientific evidence from an FDA approved clinical trial. What will docs say when they see 30% less hypo and superior PPG control? Will it then become a liability to prescribe insulin apart? What happens if a patient is hospitalized from insulin apart and the clinician knew of this data but ignored it? Medical negligence?
|
|
|
Post by oldfishtowner on Sept 13, 2018 9:59:32 GMT -5
$59 to read the full text?! It serves no purpose to publish this if you are going to require money to view the full text. I am disappointed. If someone has an account on liebertpub try logging in and see if the full text is accessible. Either way, I think I'll email Dr. Garg and asked him to uplift the public viewing fee. Liebert is open access. Is this requiring a fee because it is ahead of print or because the authors' didn't want to comply with open access? mango When I clicked on the original link just now, I believe I'm seeing the entire article without any request for a $59 fee. Perhaps something's been adjusted? Yes, I just downloaded the pdf of the entire article.
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Sept 13, 2018 10:01:32 GMT -5
I'm curious.. do studies like this "move the needle"? What is their target audience? I assume Endo's read this more so than patients and as a result might consider 'making the switch' with a PWD to start them on Afrezza?
Yes it moves the needle. Today we are up a penny. Spoke too soon. Now we are down. The share price is almost random.
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Sept 13, 2018 10:11:04 GMT -5
Do I understand this correctly? Now, our sales reps can tell this info to doctors. In the past, our reps were restricted to the label, and they could not talk about superiority. Now they can. So, this would indeed be a big deal. Per Dr. Kendall: "The completion of this proof-of-concept trial and peer-reviewed publication allows for broad sharing of these data with diabetes healthcare professionals.” Yep, all scientific evidence from an FDA approved clinical trial. What will docs say when they see 30% less hypo and superior PPG control? Will it then become a liability to prescribe insulin apart? What happens if a patient is hospitalized from insulin apart and the clinician knew of this data but ignored it? Medical negligence? Unfortunately for us, no that will not be considered actionable medical negligence.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Sept 13, 2018 10:12:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on Sept 13, 2018 10:13:49 GMT -5
The purpose of publishing in these kinds of publications is not for the sake of investors or the investment world. Dr. Kendall wants to make sure there is continuous data presented to the medical world. Dr. Kendall stated at the annual meeting that his intention was to continuously publish so that there is a vast library of proof of the effectiveness of Afrezza. This breadth of published data helps endocrinologists get over any reservations they might have. In the long term, this will drive Afrezza sales. Maybe just as important, the ADA cannot continue to ignore Afrezza as a treatment option, at least without seeming complicit.
|
|
|
Post by jlaw277 on Sept 13, 2018 10:17:02 GMT -5
I am open to correction, but I believe that Castagna said recently (one of the last two calls) that they had yet to share the STAT results outside of the ADA meeting but that with publication, that the salesforce as well as Kendall would start sharing widely. Also, I believe that the "peer reviewed" component is meaningful in terms of getting the medical community to take this seriously.
|
|