|
|
Post by savzak on Sept 4, 2015 13:01:26 GMT -5
I just finished a little chat with Spiro, kicking around the Trx numbers just for fun. He pointed out that at an absolute minimum, there are currently slightly over 2000 Afrezza users. This must be the case because the last 4 weeks of Trx total 2072. This of course doesn't count any scripts not counted by symphony. Nor does it count 3 month scripts filled more than a month ago, so the number is actually bound to be higher.
Further, if you calculate the rate of growth in Trx in the past 13 weeks (1/4 of a year) you get almost exactly 50% which annualized is of course 200%.
Obviously we're cherry picking a bit as a result of Trx improving over the past couple of weeks. Had it not been for the last two weeks this analysis would not look nearly as good. And we have to realize that Trx can't maintain such a good growth rate if Nrx doesn't start to ramp as well. But after several weeks of lamentation over scripts, it's nice to have some numbers that induce some optimism.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarheelblue004 on Sept 4, 2015 13:30:56 GMT -5
Optimistic feedback: Growth doesn't work that way ("if you calculate the rate of growth in Trx in the past 13 weeks (1/4 of a year) you get almost exactly 50% which annualized is of course 200%.") It compounds...like the editor in chief of afrezzajustbreathe!
Let's say you start with 100 scripts and you expect 50% growth per quarter.
Start: 100
End Q1: 150
End Q2: 225
End Q3: 338
End Q4: 506
500% annual growth.
But alas, I'm even more optimistic than that. I truely believe that the past quarter does not reflect true demand for the product, but instead demand severely hampered by insurance coverage. If / when coverage starts to improve (one quarter from now? two from now? hopefully we don't have to wait another year!) I expect the rate of adoption and growth to far exceed what we're seeing today.
Cheers guys, have a great Labor Day weekend!
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Sept 4, 2015 14:17:59 GMT -5
tarheelblue004... I beg to differ. Who says TRx follow compounding growth. Many processes in this world do not. There is no rationale to justify applying a compounding model to TRx. A much more logical way of looking at it would be the underlying growth of NRx and the retention rate. Some would blindly apply the same compounding model to both sets of data, without even realizing that mathematically those cannot both hold. I fully agree that results to date do not reflect potential. They also do not reflect a process that has compounding growth rate of TRx.
|
|
|
|
Post by od on Sept 4, 2015 14:52:33 GMT -5
Apologies for repeating myself, but I don't see a broadening of the prescriber base. Even with coverage barriers, I would expect greater NRx growth. Been through this scenario before and maintain my confidence in SNY. TRxs are nice but they will plateau soon without a NRx chart-that-goes-up.
|
|
|
|
Post by compound26 on Sept 4, 2015 15:07:30 GMT -5
Apologies for repeating myself, but I don't see a broadening of the prescriber base. Even with coverage barriers, I would expect greater NRx growth. Been through this scenario before and maintain my confidence in SNY. TRxs are nice but they will plateau soon without a NRx chart-that-goes-up. I agree that prescribing base needs to be broadened. Looking at the Afrezza-prescribing physician list maintained by Sam, one will notice that California and Florida physicians now constitute around 50% of all the physicians listed there. Assuming Sam's list catches a good percentage of all the prescribing physicians (which I believe is the case as the total number in Sam's list is around 60-70 already), do the doctors or residents of California and Florida have an out-sized interest in Afrezza compared with doctors or residents of the other states? I do not think so. So I think, naturally, and, over time, the penetration rate of Afrezza in the other states will improve to catch up with that of California and Florida. If that occurs tomorrow (hypothetically) and everything else remains unchanged, by a rough estimate, with just that simple improvement in penetration rate, the TRx would be around 2.5 times that of the status quo. That will translate to a weekly TRx of 1,500 and an annual sales of $40 million. Of course, over time, factoring in DTC, insurance coverage improvement, natural growth in sales, the actual sales should be much higher than that. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Sept 4, 2015 15:43:40 GMT -5
compound26... formularylookup.com shows that FL has slightly better coverage than average, but CA seems at or below national level for coverage without restriction. I could understand docs in areas with better coverage might become prescribers more quickly but that doesn't seem to be the case to explain CA and FL in Sam's database.
|
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Sept 4, 2015 20:12:44 GMT -5
I wonder if, while negotiations are ensuing between Sanofi and insurers for better coverage, Sanofi is simply targeting areas with a higher annual income. In other words, diabetics in these targeted areas can better afford to pay for the prescriptions. (Incidentally, the average annual income of TIME prescribers is $70k). Could it be as simple as that?
I also wonder if Sanofi has been focusing on gathering specific patient information, as permitted by HIPAA, in a strategy designed to present empirical evidence of certain benefits of Afrezza to insurers, physicians and the FDA.
The pace of sales is too slow, which suggests to me that Sanofi is waiting for something(s) to be achieved before flipping the switch on a broader sales & marketing campaign.
|
|
|
|
Post by kball on Sept 7, 2015 7:41:19 GMT -5
Couple things.
FL and Ca are populous states, so that may be a reason.
I'm glad most docs arent in Alaska and Wyoming.
And Al mentioned several years ago he felt adequate production will be the biggest obstacle facing the companies. Not that there wouldn't be other obstacles but i always reflect back on his comment (when pps has me petrified)
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Sept 7, 2015 10:57:03 GMT -5
It's very nice that the TRx went up somewhat dramatically. It's the shape of the curve of the NRx that is of concern. That needs to turn up, and I'm confident that it will, primarily, as insurance coverage becomes better and better, and secondarily as more docs become knowledgeable. I'd certainly like to see that curve turn upward before the end(o)f this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by ezrasfund on Sept 7, 2015 17:43:14 GMT -5
It will also help when doctors see that there are no reports of lung problems. So far that seems to be the case, and many of the early adopters are athletic.
|
|
|
|
Post by od on Sept 7, 2015 18:41:14 GMT -5
It will also help when doctors see that there are no reports of lung problems. So far that seems to be the case, and many of the early adopters are athletic. You bet, NRxs are dependent on provider understanding of/comfort with Afrezza. Not challenging (aggressively)...'no reports of lung problems'. Where would they be reported for you/us to access? |
|
|
|
Post by ezrasfund on Sept 7, 2015 19:17:57 GMT -5
Just noticing that some early Afrezza users are athletes who are concerned about insulin on board during a long workout (or triathlon). I think these guys would mention if they felt they were having diminished lung function. (unless they're working for the Mann)
|
|
|
|
Post by spiro on Sept 7, 2015 21:30:43 GMT -5
Spiro wasn't aware that so many people knew that he was an outstanding athlete. Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by bradleysbest on Sept 7, 2015 21:54:57 GMT -5
Spiro = Stud Muffin
Wrong jersey though...., Fight On!
|
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Sept 8, 2015 3:56:43 GMT -5
Spiro wasn't aware that so many people knew that he was an outstanding athlete. They'll be even more amazed that you taught Braxton your famous Mallomar Spin move. https://vine.co/v/etJnO1lvnKm |
|
