|
|
Post by oldfishtowner on Dec 31, 2021 11:30:25 GMT -5
I am surprised that no one has offered that UTHR chose MNKD over LQDA because it has the superior technology. While neither MNKD, UTHR nor LQDA has run head-to-head trials to show relative effectiveness, a look at the pk data shows that the maximum serum concentration of treprostinil is 60% higher for TyvasoDPI than the same dose of Yutrepia. Clearly MNKD's technology (technosphere and/or inhaler) is the superior technology for drug delivery.
Also if LQDA's patents prevent MNKD and UTHR from marketing doses over 100 mcg then why isn't the converse true, that MNKD's patents prevent LQDA from marketing doses of 100 mcg or less?
|
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Dec 31, 2021 15:45:19 GMT -5
I am surprised that no one has offered that UTHR chose MNKD over LQDA because it has the superior technology. While neither MNKD, UTHR nor LQDA has run head-to-head trials to show relative effectiveness, a look at the pk data shows that the maximum serum concentration of treprostinil is 60% higher for TyvasoDPI than the same dose of Yutrepia. Clearly MNKD's technology (technosphere and/or inhaler) is the superior technology for drug delivery.
Also if LQDA's patents prevent MNKD and UTHR from marketing doses over 100 mcg then why isn't the converse true, that MNKD's patents prevent LQDA from marketing doses of 100 mcg or less? Good to keep in mind that UTHR also chose LQDA. They weren’t able to agree to terms, while they got the terms they wanted with MNKD. Reasonable to assume that both MNKD and LQDA technology is legit. Both sides say theirs is superior, and we know of at least one analyst who says LQDA’s is superior (but he is biased so we can take it with a grain of salt). Time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jan 1, 2022 12:11:45 GMT -5
I am surprised that no one has offered that UTHR chose MNKD over LQDA because it has the superior technology. While neither MNKD, UTHR nor LQDA has run head-to-head trials to show relative effectiveness, a look at the pk data shows that the maximum serum concentration of treprostinil is 60% higher for TyvasoDPI than the same dose of Yutrepia. Clearly MNKD's technology (technosphere and/or inhaler) is the superior technology for drug delivery.
Also if LQDA's patents prevent MNKD and UTHR from marketing doses over 100 mcg then why isn't the converse true, that MNKD's patents prevent LQDA from marketing doses of 100 mcg or less? Good to keep in mind that UTHR also chose LQDA. They weren’t able to agree to terms, while they got the terms they wanted with MNKD. Reasonable to assume that both MNKD and LQDA technology is legit. Both sides say theirs is superior, and we know of at least one analyst who says LQDA’s is superior (but he is biased so we can take it with a grain of salt). Time will tell. You have an odd definition of “chose”. MNKD got a contract and payments of more than $100 million. UTHR got sued. Hmm, |
|
|
|
Post by sweedee79 on Jan 1, 2022 15:04:37 GMT -5
I am surprised that no one has offered that UTHR chose MNKD over LQDA because it has the superior technology. While neither MNKD, UTHR nor LQDA has run head-to-head trials to show relative effectiveness, a look at the pk data shows that the maximum serum concentration of treprostinil is 60% higher for TyvasoDPI than the same dose of Yutrepia. Clearly MNKD's technology (technosphere and/or inhaler) is the superior technology for drug delivery.
Also if LQDA's patents prevent MNKD and UTHR from marketing doses over 100 mcg then why isn't the converse true, that MNKD's patents prevent LQDA from marketing doses of 100 mcg or less? Good to keep in mind that UTHR also chose LQDA. They weren’t able to agree to terms, while they got the terms they wanted with MNKD. Reasonable to assume that both MNKD and LQDA technology is legit. Both sides say theirs is superior, and we know of at least one analyst who says LQDA’s is superior (but he is biased so we can take it with a grain of salt). Time will tell. You are right Cretin.. he is biased and short Mnkd... I wish I were a scientist and could understand all of this.. We are all biased.. that's the problem.. 🥴 What I do have to go on is Afrezza.. I know how good that is.. |
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Jan 1, 2022 15:52:25 GMT -5
I am surprised that no one has offered that UTHR chose MNKD over LQDA because it has the superior technology. While neither MNKD, UTHR nor LQDA has run head-to-head trials to show relative effectiveness, a look at the pk data shows that the maximum serum concentration of treprostinil is 60% higher for TyvasoDPI than the same dose of Yutrepia. Clearly MNKD's technology (technosphere and/or inhaler) is the superior technology for drug delivery.
Also if LQDA's patents prevent MNKD and UTHR from marketing doses over 100 mcg then why isn't the converse true, that MNKD's patents prevent LQDA from marketing doses of 100 mcg or less? Good to keep in mind that UTHR also chose LQDA. They weren’t able to agree to terms, while they got the terms they wanted with MNKD. Reasonable to assume that both MNKD and LQDA technology is legit. Both sides say theirs is superior, and we know of at least one analyst who says LQDA’s is superior (but he is biased so we can take it with a grain of salt). Time will tell. Both may be legit but if the above pk data is correct it seems TReT is the better technology for getting into the deep lung and absorbed. Is there any data on what happens with their carrier particle? We know FDKP passes through the lung and excreted. That in itself is a big deal. In negotiating a deal its always best to have a backup plan and to have the party you are negotiating with think you have other options and that you are willing to walk. MNKD has a proven platform, proven manufacturing experience and better PK data. Is there one thing which LQDA has which would be an advantage? It seems to me LQDA was clearly UTHR's second choice but there is no way they could tell their invests that. It makes sense they told them they could not come to terms with UTHR. |
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Jan 1, 2022 19:29:52 GMT -5
Good to keep in mind that UTHR also chose LQDA. They weren’t able to agree to terms, while they got the terms they wanted with MNKD. Reasonable to assume that both MNKD and LQDA technology is legit. Both sides say theirs is superior, and we know of at least one analyst who says LQDA’s is superior (but he is biased so we can take it with a grain of salt). Time will tell. Is there one thing which LQDA has which would be an advantage? It seems to me LQDA was clearly UTHR's second choice but there is no way they could tell their invests that. It makes sense they told them they could not come to terms with UTHR. Dosage advantage may be with LQDA, correct? The word is UTHR wanted to give LQDA a 10% royalty and LQDA wanted higher. Do we know what MNKD’s royalty deal is? I seem to recall “low double digits” but have we learned the actual %? The higher our royalty is, the more likely you are correct and MNKD was clearly UTHR’s first choice. That seems like a more logical approach than just assuming LQDA is lying to investors. |
|
|
|
Post by georgethenight2 on Jan 1, 2022 20:35:29 GMT -5
Regardless of the outcome, UTHR wants to increase the patient population, correct. One could then assume, that there is room for two Trep-T companies. And while we may not like it, we have faced more difficult obstacles and here we still stand. Hoping for some damn good news soon so we can put this fiasco behind us and start making some bread; turning 2022 into the year that we FINALLY turn cash flow positive!
|
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Jan 2, 2022 6:26:57 GMT -5
Totally agree there is room for two.
And we are due for some things to finally break our way, let’s hope 2022 is the year.
|
|
|
|
Post by neil36 on Jan 3, 2022 18:44:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by boca1girl on Jan 3, 2022 19:42:47 GMT -5
But we already knew this, right? They are a little late with that news article. |
|
|
|
Post by mymann on Jan 3, 2022 19:51:54 GMT -5
But we already knew this, right? They are a little late with that news article. Maybe article was released to help short lqda? |
|
