Will LCZ696 still launch after Alzheimer's WSJ article?

Discussion in 'Novartis' started by Anonymous, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:21 AM.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Do you think this will delay the launch?
     

  2. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    I'm worried. Wish we'd get a statement from leadership on this.
     
  3. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    It will launch but flounder. We will not be able to give samples away!
     
  4. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    what u should be worried about is what doctor in their right mind would prescribe this over a max dose arb or a better ACE like ramipril + diuretic + beta blocker
    which would undoubtedly lead to better result for a fraction of the cost without the potential for catastrophic side effects
    Novartis stellar reputation with rat studied valturna/tekturna, the honorable japanese studies or the enlightened design of packer's trial not withstanding
     
  5. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    I'm sure we will still try no matter what but it's up to the fda to decide. Even without this article it wasn't a guarantee.
     
  6. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    I would guess that it will launch after the WSJ article since the article is already out. Would have been way cooler to launch it before the article though.
     
  7. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Glad I got laid off.....geez. This company is cursed when it comes to blockbuster launches!
     
  8. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Oooops, now watch the spin begin. Mayber a letter to HCPs . None of it will be good in the end, just a large question mark for the prescriber. A hard thing to overcome for the face to face people. If a delay in launch occurs.... Then what.... If you don't know yet you haven't been paying attention.
     
  9. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    NVS is a clusterfuck- Can't launch a drug!
    They just launched a drug in derm and it wasn't even available-
     
  10. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Once again we will assist in the non branded (i.e. Heart Failure) educating of the physicians, bringing awareness and disease state educating, isn't that terrific!!!!
    Similar to DPP4 and DRI at least we are good for something.
     
  11. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Gail will fix it don't worry.
     
  12. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    To consider this 'awareness' campaign as anything remotely related to an education via communication majors & the like to MD's is as laughable as it is delusional
     
  13. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    The Alzheimers/dementia concern is theoretical. The two agents contained in this molecule will potentially counteract each other.. Some of the biggest names in HF don't dismiss the dementia concerns, however even the most vocal KOL's who have criticized PARADIGM aren't buying into the neuro cognitive piece. If you have sold in this arena, you're likely to understand that this drug will be used. A prospective reduction in mortality supercedes a neuro cognitive signal any day of the week. Considering patients continue to die despite deploying what are currently the Gold Standard treatments, physicians are looking for a reasonable alternative..
     
  14. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    You'r out to lunch! If you have sold in this market you would know that physicians will use higher dose arbs and drugs that they are already comfortable with. They are NOT going to take a chance on Neuro issues with a new drug that hasn't been proven with long term experience. they will look at Novartis' history with new compounds such as Tekturna and well..we all know what happened there. The credibility and trust is not there and they will not use this new compound very much until it is proven with clinical experience that shows there is no correlation with Neuro issues.
     
  15. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Sounds like someone figured out what the company line is going to be. Of course it is theoretical...the drug isn't even out yet! Everything is theoretical...including our numbers on mortality and hospitalization. Just because it happened in a trial doesn't mean it will transfer to real world success at those levels and it is likely that it won't.
    Also, patients with HF issues are already at higher risk for neuro issues so HCPs are going to look at this with a lot of skepticism when they have ways to get similar results that are cheaper and have been studied more extensively. We are also going to get nailed by the insurance companies over the pricing.
     
  16. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Love the word theoretically we used that a lot with tek and Val look where that went.
     
  17. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Diovan redux - branded name
     
  18. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Hmmm.. more Arb at what expense? Hospitals are already getting their proverbial asses handed to them on a silver platter in regards to 30 days readmission rates for HF. If you understand core measures and how physicians and institutions are either bonused/penalized, you'd ascertain your (meaning the physician) approach is lacking logic. So let's give something that a patient has already received, up the dose and worsen kidney function.. most of these patients have severely compromised renal function to begin with, so just "increasing their arb" will only further exacerbate kidney function and worsen heart failure. HF Protocols currently exist in many institutions to mitigate poor patient care. I have been around a long time in this arena and know true HF specialists and many clinical cards are starving for a alternative. However, you're right in stating that some will just increase the arb without understanding the complexity of the disease state and the multiple manifestations of HF..
     
  19. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    You are correct on readmission and bonus structure, however, here is the question. Which will provide greater return- an overpriced agent with no real world experience, or an effective compliance program. I contend that investing in compliance is a much better choice. You will produce much greater results improving compliance to the traditional regimen than just adding a new agent.
     
  20. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    First, great point. Lack of compliance will always be an issue. Sure, investing in more vigilant types of adherence programs for patients will yield better results for some. However, many patients still remain train wrecks despite compliance and don't have the ability to tolerate agents that are currently prescribed. Or, more importantly, don't achieve the hemodynamic stability and better outcomes regardless of treatment/excellent compliance. Despite what our thoughts are as reps, there are a large number of prescribers that are a hell of a lot smarter and more influential than we are (and are not on Novartis payroll) that see the value in a large, prospectively designed trial showing improvement in important parameters of treatment and are eager to use this. Believe me, I am the antithesis of the company Kool-aid drinking, believe everything our company states.. However, this drug will surely have its place. Just my humble opinion (that really doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot) at the of the day.. :)