|
|
Post by peterpan on Apr 22, 2015 19:23:13 GMT -5
IS IT THE BEST CHOICE? The same 3 Phases launch were applied to Exubera and it was a Total Failure I understand that the products are not the same and Afrezza is Superior but I Question the 3 Phases Launch I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS THE BEST CHOICE FOR AFREZZA FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The product is very simple to use and the bioequivalence are clear and simple 2. PCP and Endo and patients do not need extensive training because very simple to use 3. Sanofi just wanted to protect they Lantus market share and Privilege Toujeo for Launch 4. Sanofi is positionning Afrezza in a niche
I understand that they do not want to miss the Afrezza Launch but by beiing to precaucious they are killing the initial enthousiasim
If they is not a mor subatantial level of Scripts MNKD is going to $2.50 in the next month!
Opinions Welcome! |
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Apr 22, 2015 19:33:51 GMT -5
peter I think you meant to post this on the yahoo board.
|
|
|
|
Post by tigiron on Apr 22, 2015 20:07:20 GMT -5
IS IT THE BEST CHOICE? The same 3 Phases launch were applied to Exubera and it was a Total Failure I understand that the products are not the same and Afrezza is Superior but I Question the 3 Phases Launch I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS THE BEST CHOICE FOR AFREZZA FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The product is very simple to use and the bioequivalence are clear and simple 2. PCP and Endo and patients do not need extensive training because very simple to use 3. Sanofi just wanted to protect they Lantus market share and Privilege Toujeo for Launch 4. Sanofi is positionning Afrezza in a niche
I understand that they do not want to miss the Afrezza Launch but by beiing to precaucious they are killing the initial enthousiasim
If they is not a mor subatantial level of Scripts MNKD is going to $2.50 in the next month!
Opinions Welcome! In your opinion, what exactly are those 3 Phases? What would be your approach? Will coalescing the 3 phases that you perceived help in any way? Why would Sanofi waste their resources and reputation to kill or marginalize Afrezza? They can just let it wither away or let others to do the dirty job while enjoy the show sitting on the sideline? |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Apr 22, 2015 20:20:52 GMT -5
All four points are erroneous, as is your lead in. I don't have a clue where you dug up with this "3 Phase Launch" so let's scratch that right off the page.
1. Every diabetic that has blogged their initial experience with Afrezza as requiring a trial and error period, or "dialing it in". Physicians don't like ambiguity. Afrezza will not seem simple after years of micro-adjusting insulin for controlling GS, Afrezza will unnerve the initiate...at first. Physicians and Endos must understand what questions will be asked and know how to answer them. It's not clear and simple, so education and training are critical.
2. If this point is referring to the hardware, your point is valid. But the dosing, including possible basal adjustments, must be clearly understood by doctor and patient. Sam, Eric, Amy and other early adopters are seasoned T1's with CGM to continally monitor their blood glucose and adjust their dosages. All of this stuff is going to be new and completely unknown to early T2's. The fact that spiro figured out the proper dosing is very encouraging (no offense, spiro) but, again, physicians need to understand Afrezza's dosing before they can give instructions to a patient who has never used insulin.
3. Your implication appears to be that Sanofi is dragging their feet with Afrezza to protect their franchise drugs, which has no merit as Lantus/Toujeo are basal while Afrezza forms the perfect complement as a prandial/mealtime insulin.
4.Sanofi's presentation of their plans for Afrezza indicate anything but a niche. Their first target for Afrezza is the 5.1 million Lantus users, of which they believe 3.1 million will switch to Afrezza from mealtime injectables, dominated by Novo and Lilly. Sanofi's other target for Afrezza is three times bigger, what the former CEO called the lost decade or early insulin treatment resistant diabetics. Combine these two targets and you'd be foolish to use the word "niche" to describe it. It's a huge market.
This is not a launch that imitates Pfizer's failed "it will sell itself" sales & marketing campaign. Sanofi themselves stated that Pfizer lacked the expertise in the field of diabetes care and they failed. Not the case here. Not even close.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterpan on Apr 22, 2015 20:29:58 GMT -5
So how do you explain that Toujeo willl have 10x more scripts in the same time frame?
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Apr 22, 2015 20:42:00 GMT -5
So how do you explain that Toujeo willl have 10x more scripts in the same time frame? Toujeo is just a souped up Lantus. A very easy substitution for physicians to make. Afrezza is a whole new entity - takes time to catch on. |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Apr 22, 2015 20:52:35 GMT -5
I agree with Liane 100% that physicians understand basal injections. No problem there.
Inhaled insulin with an ultra fast PK/PD profile is something entirely different, however. Much better, and it will eventually be understood as much, much simpler than other insulins and analogs, but for now it's completely NEW.
|
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Apr 22, 2015 21:03:48 GMT -5
Toujeo is just a brand extension (or substitute) for a current product going off patent. So everyone is familiar with it and how it is used. It may be slightly better than Lantus but mostly the same.
Afrezza is a totally different protocol (no or less carb counting for example) than the logs. Also act differently etc so longer education process for all including Ssnofi reps, endos/pcp's and patients.
Differences seem fairly clear to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by esstan2001 on Apr 22, 2015 21:12:08 GMT -5
So how do you explain that Toujeo willl have 10x more scripts in the same time frame? Well...it is a slightly improved version of Sanofi's Lantus that they sell over a billion of, sales channels / existing patient base already there for this upgraded replacement. Almost no educating or sales effort required. Use similar as Lantus. yahoo. The place for you. |
|
|
|
Post by traderdennis on Apr 23, 2015 0:18:49 GMT -5
Whether correct or not, there is a prejudgment by a number of endocrinologists about using the lungs as a delivery device of hormones into the pulmonary system. This post is not to discuss whether this hypothesis is true or not, just the perception and belief of a community of endocrinologists who believe that Afrezza is dangerous to the lungs, etc.
I believe for a large number of these Doctors it is going to take a period of years after seeing studies that the benefits of Afrezza insulin's pk/pd outweigh the potential issues with the lungs. We in the US are a very litigious society. At this early point it is probably unrealistic for a conservative doctor to potentially risk his practice versus an existing protocol that is not very risky.
I personally believe that it is going to take great results from the initial set of early adopters which if taken at face value from social media seem to be their results. I really see the scripts as a very very small boulder at the top of an enormous mountain slowly rolling towards the bottom, grabbing new layers of snow. All of the longs certainly want this to go down very fast.
I hope part of the SNY training to docs that are willing to prescribe Afrezza is to pick the optimum patients who will excel at their care. If a DTC campaign were to start, a number of T2's come in who take their meds 75% of the time, don't exercise and potentially lie about their past smoking histories to take the new wonderdrug, the boulder will go down fast, but too many edge cases of using the wrong patients will doom Afrezza to an Exubra like death. In turn if the first batch of results like Afrezza user...etc may start to turn the least skeptical group of docs we can get the boulder to move just a bit quicker. Long term results will drive long term sales. Afrezza is potential a disrupter, but a few mishaps could kill this thing far too quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by chyaboi on Apr 23, 2015 1:03:32 GMT -5
To elaborate from viewing this board for some time (not as long as others) posters use to post opinions with back up information I.e hard data, peer reviewed documents, case studies etc... This began discussions and allowed greater thought and collaboration. It also enabled people to make or get out of positions. And for some time it is more common and is becoming more prevalent for posters to post on this board without backup information. They also receive less and less scrutiny for doing so. Peterpan please backup your information with some evidence.
I totally agree with savzaks post earlier in another thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Apr 23, 2015 4:32:27 GMT -5
I'm locking this thread. Negative opinions are OK, but please back it up with some facts. And everyone - please let's avoid the YMB circus mentality.
|
|
