AZ News from the Street 2018

Who needs a pipeline, we're so productive now? That last guy left in R&D is awesome!! By one metric anyway.


At AstraZeneca, fewer drug projects bring big productivity jump
January 18, 2018
By Ben Hirschler

LONDON (Reuters) - A focus on fewer diseases, together with cuts in laboratories and staff, has delivered a more than fourfold increase in research productivity at drugmaker AstraZeneca (AZN.L), based on one key measure of success.

The analysis published on Friday comes at a time of soul-searching among large pharmaceutical companies as they compete with smaller biotech firms, which are getting new drugs to market more efficiently.

The turnaround evident this decade at AstraZeneca follows a shrinking of its global research and development organisation and a revision of R&D strategy in 2011, a year before the arrival of current chief executive Pascal Soriot.

Soriot has since continued the shift to a deeper and narrower focus on priority therapeutic areas, notably cancer.

"All these improvements have happened with less people, less sites and less money," Mene Pangalos, who leads AstraZeneca's Innovative Medicines and Early Development unit, told Reuters.

Previously, AstraZeneca was a laggard in the pharmaceutical industry with a dismal track record in launching new medicines and a rapidly eroding base business, due to expiring patents on its older medicines.

Its average success for getting a drug from the discovery phase through to successful completion of final-stage Phase III clinical trials was at an all-time low of 4 percent in 2005-10, below the industry average of 6 percent.

But in the five years from 2012 to 2016, this jumped to 19 percent, while the industry average, according to consultancy CMR International, was little changed. AstraZeneca scientists published the latest findings in the journal Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

Significantly, there was a marked drop in the number of projects started at the discovery stage, with the total falling to just 76 in 2012-16 from 287 in 2005-10.

"We're working on far fewer programmes and the probability of success on those programmes is going up," Pangalos said.

"Going from 4 percent to nearly 20 percent is something we are all very happy with but I still want us to do better ... we're still failing 80 percent of the time."

INVESTOR SENTIMENT

The productivity boost coincides with an improvement in shareholder sentiment as investors have started to bet on AstraZeneca's ability to replace older medicines with new products, particularly in oncology. A failed bid from Pfizer (PFE.N) in 2014 has also helped the investment story.

Today, two-thirds of analysts recommend buying the shares, up from one in five in 2012.

The decision by Pangalos and his colleagues to detail the company's successes and failures in two academic papers, the first of which appeared in 2014, is unusual. Rivals such as GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L) and Pfizer have published some details of R&D productivity in the past but the AstraZeneca review is more comprehensive.

Still, the data does not track the profitability of AstraZeneca's research activities, since even when a new drug succeeds in final clinical tests and wins regulatory approval, commercial success is not guaranteed.

A report last month by consultancy Deloitte found projected returns at 12 of the world's top drugmakers had fallen in recent years, even though the overall of number of new drugs had increased.

AstraZeneca itself has had some notable successes, such as its new cancer pills Tagrisso and Lynparza, but prospects for other approved products, including its high-profile immunotherapy drug Imfinzi, have been more mixed.

Imfinzi suffered a major lung cancer trial setback in July 2017, although it then went on to show impressive results in another lung cancer setting.

 

Laughed my ass off at the stupid fucking liberals marching and chanting in NYC, L.A. Seattle, Chicago, Philly Wash D.C. wearing their ridiculous pink pussy hats and carrying their hate Trump signs. And their slogan is, this year it is about hate. I thought that was the post inauguration march last year. So what do these cities have in common? You don't change people's opinions by marching with people who agree with you and in places where all the rest of the people agree with you. Martin Luther King didn't march in African American neighborhoods to change opinions. He marched where people hated him. These people don't realize that their hate of Trump just makes the Trump voters more motivated.

 

They could start by keeping women like Madonna and Pelosi away from a microphone. Do we really want Madonna to represent our moral and ethical standards for our young women? Or Nancy Pelosi who flies her private jets at taxpayer's expense and takes lavish trips paid for by her donors and lobbyists while calling a $2000 bonus to the hard working people in America "crumbs" ?

 

They are all corrupt, but the Dems take to levels most would not believe.

 

The Dems and Media are going to regret the day that they opened up an investigation of the Russian collusion stuff. Digging deep into how the Obama administration allowed the FBI and Justice department to run its own biased agenda to try to guarantee a Hillary victory is all coming out now. We know they used the IRS to punish conservatives but this will take corruption to a whole new level. How high up it goes is the next question.
My guess is that the Clintons went around Obama and used their known political cronies inside Justice, State and the FBI to go after Trump and to cover up the Clinton Foundation and election corruption.

 

Sure it must be a witch hunt!

Didn't all those past prior transition teams and administrations also have multiple treasonous and felonious contacts with the Russian mafia and then repeatedly lie about it? No, then never mind, allow the patriotic investigations into the conspiracy to rig the elections in order to lift the sanctions against Russia and into the laundering of Russian money to avoid the sanctions to continue.

It was probably just all about more adoptions anyway! Those kind hearted souls.

 

The only proven collusion with the Russians came from Hillary and the DNC. Paid the Russians for propaganda against Trump that the Russians would have given them for free. Then they used the phony dossier to get a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. And when that didn't work out so well, they used their cronies in the FBI to start the Investigation into Trump and Russia. I am sure they will come up with something on Trump but Russian collusion won't be it. Remember they started an investigation of Bill Clinton and Whitewater shady dealings and ended up with the Monica scandal. Hell the scandals on the Clintons are so vast that it is taking 6 one hour episodes to cover them all. If you want to know the real reason Hillary lost then watch the documentary, "Scandalous"

 

No collusion? I guess you forgot all about the Donnie Jr meeting with the Russian Agent at the Trump Tower and the bargain to get Hillary's emails released by Wikileaks. The bargain was to get rid of the sanctions and recognize Russia as the owner of the Eastern Ukraine. By the way, it will be proven, by Mueller, that despite his usual denials and lies, Donnie Sr. spoke with them too. And general Flynn and Carter Page and Papadoupalous and Sam Clovis....etc. All just Coffee boys I suppose! Even Bannon described it as Treason.

It was all just about adoptions remember?

Who cares about the Clinton's now? They are not even part of the government anymore. They are ancient history. Why do you even care about them anymore?

 

All you need to know is the FBI now claims they cannot find 5 months of text messages on government issued phones to two of their top people. We have 50000 text messages right up until the Trump transition period and then presto all gone. Just like they said they couldn't find the 30,000 e mails missing when Hillary had her private server smashed and her phones busted to bits with hammers. Do you have any idea how the media would react to just these two things if it was Trump. Do you think that Hillary's campaign never had any meetings with any Russians? Come on and get real. When the American public learns what was going on inside the Obama Justice Dept. it will make Watergate look like little league. And it is all going to come out soon. Even CNN won't be able to provide cover.

 

The microscope was so far up the Obama administration’s ass 24/7 for 8 years. Finding toilet paper crumbs is the only scandal that all you haters have found and will ever find.

 

Wanna bet idiot?

 

Does anyone believe that the FBI cannot find these text messages? That it is only these two agents and that it is only the most critical 5 months following Trump's election and continuing until the day Mueller was appointed? And it is all because these two and only these two were issued Samsung phones. How in the hell could anyone trust anything the FBI says or does after this?

 

I think someone is watching too much of the False News Network lies. Of course, watching any amount of that network's disinformation is the leading cause of being uninformed on any actual facts.

These lies are only surfacing now because they are getting really desperate. They know that with Flynn and Bannon flipped, who both knew everything, Mueller has them all by the short hairs. These treasonous criminals are all going to jail. That's why they're making all of this crazy stuff up.

Sadly, some morons actually believe the lies.

 

You have been watching too much of the Clinton New Network. Russia, Russia, Russia, you know with all of the leaks that if they had any evidence of actual collusion we would know about it now. So Don Jr. took a 20 minute meeting that was set up with a false promise of dirt on Hillary. Do you think the Clinton people would have met with them if they said they had dirt on Trump? The same Hillary that lied for months and then admitted that she paid the Russians for dirt on Trump? That same Hillary? Just calling something fake without evidence is child's play. If Fox News is lying then what evidence do you have of their lies?

 

assholes

 

A setback for a breast cancer treatment competitor to AZ:

Puma's drug is approved and is launching in the US. The setback is in the EU.

Puma Biotech Plunges as Cancer Drug Setback Stuns Wall Street
By
Tatiana Darie
January 24, 2018, 9:11 AM EST
Puma Biotechnology Inc. lost about a quarter of its market value in early trading in New York after saying that its breast cancer drug is unlikely to gain approval in Europe without additional data. The announcement came as a surprise to investors since the treatment, called neratinib, was approved by U.S. regulators in July.

Many analysts cut their price targets and Cowen downgraded the stock, saying that without European approval, the "M&A narrative" becomes more challenging. The shares are on pace to open at their lowest levels since May.

Here’s what analysts are saying about Puma’s news.

Cowen, Chris Shibutani

• Sees EU approval as unlikely after European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) commentary on negative vote trend
• Says commentary also heightens the risk regarding regulatory approval in regions outside the U.S. and EU, and likely "blunts the scope of strategic options"
• Still sees a 65 percent chance of success on pending results of late-stage study in metastatic breast cancer, the trial known as “Nala”
• Rating cut to market perform from outperform; price target cut to $68 from $123

RBC, Kennen MacKay

• Given high likelihood for a negative CHMP opinion, sees chance of approval in EU and other countries now at 5 percent
• “Surprised” on disclosure after talks with Puma’s management seemed to suggest a positive opinion with a label recommending use in only high-risk patients
• Doesn’t anticipate another trial in extended adjuvant patients, and looks to management guidance for what the additional steps could represent
• Rates sector perform, price target cut to $77 from $108

Barclays, Gena Wang

• Says CHMP vote "complicates" the drug’s regulatory path in EU, and comes as a surprise to Barclays and most investors
• Says a selloff of about 30 percent suggests investors are largely removing the EU market opportunity; sees move as overdone until there’s more clarity
• Notes it’s still unclear whether the company will be required to do a separate study or just submit additional data from existing studies
• Rates overweight, price target $122

Leerink, Michael Schmidt

• Removes ex-U.S. sales in adjuvant HER2-positive breast cancer from model but remains positive on the U.S. opportunity for the drug
• Says the U.S. launch remains "key for the stock"
• Sees a 75 percent probability of success for the pending results from the second Phase 3 trial of neratinib in metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer patients, expected in the first half of this year
• Reiterates outperform rating, price target cut to $107 from $141

 

Evidence of Fox News Lies, are you for real?

A quick search turns up plenty, here is a list of fifty lies that have been fact checked that originally came from the Daily Show:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/feb/26/fact-checks-behind-daily-shows-50-fox-news-lies/

 

OMG leave this thread alone. You are inappropriate. Start your own stupid political thread.

 

There are many political thoughts on this thread lately.

These thoughts showing strong polarization and division in this country are not completely irrelevant to the stock market valuations that are the topic of this thread, including the AZ stock value.

Things like still little understood effects of new tax law changes, more potential government shutdowns over various contentious issues, new tariffs being levied on international trade, likely raises in interest rates coming to counteract the now rapidly falling dollar, rising gasoline prices, which are themselves strongly tied to the falling dollar value, as oil is still largely traded in dollars, evidence of severe froth in speculation markets, as is seen with things like bitcoin, as well as potentially more high level administration resignations and potentially additional indictments of high level administration officials, can all have strong effects on consumer confidence and investment decisions. Many of these newly developing forces will raise prices for the average consumers for necessities and take cash away from more discretionary parts of the economy. The change in market confidence may occur suddenly as has often occurred in the past endings of wild bull markets. Pharmaceutical stocks like AZ often do relatively better in that environment, as health treatments are considered more non-discretionary. Sectors like technology might fare more poorly.

We may now soon be leaving the long time comfort zone of low interest rates, low market volatility, high confidence levels, and the booming bull market, especially if some of these looming threats occur anytime on the short term. The bull market may still last a while longer, but all bull markets eventually come to an end. When exactly that will happen is still anyone's guess, but it will happen eventually. Opinions will vary, but the market will decide in the end what are the proper stock valuations for AZ and other assets.

 

Pompous windbag. Leave the thread.