BCMA. ?

Discussion in 'GlaxoSmithKline' started by anonymous, May 13, 2020 at 11:00 PM.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    If you followed the pied piper over here from BI, you may want to start making other plans. THINGS ARE NOT GOiNG WELL.

    Southern charm can’t help what is coming your way. Enjoy your iPhone “A-Levun” for now.

    kerrrrplunk!
     

  2. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Don’t get me wrong. I am happy to have a job in this environment, but this is not the picture I was painted while interviewing for this role. It is clear Doug Smith does not have much of a clue as to what is going on and merely a puppet to Mike P. There is zero accountability in this organization. At least at that level.
     
  3. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    It does not matter who is in charge, the OBU as a whole is so scattered. No direction, lots of busy work. Gonna be rough coming up.
     
  4. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Wake up people. The reason Heme is being trained on Zejula is because BCMA is a failure. They are going to try and steal our jobs when heads are on the chopping block. Would not be surprised if DS was behind the Jeffries slashing. How tight are you with your Heme counterpart. They are going to stab you in the back first chance they get.
     
  5. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Loving this. My Zejula rep does everything and my manager (former GSK) is as clueless as they come. Definitely going to retire here. Thanks for the $$$
     
  6. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    ODAC will deny this dog. Get used to slinging Zejula.
     
  7. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Someone must know something that has not trickled to the field.
     
  8. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    You poor poor people. What you haven't figured out yet is that you now work for GSK. Which means micro-management and a primary care sales mentality. While your title says "oncology specialist" you will be treated as a primary care foot soldier. Ludicrous ride-alongs. Call metrics. Business Planning meetings every month. Your manager constantly asking why your sales are not at goal. and then..PIPs. You will find this out is very short order. Most of you will leave and good for you. This will allow more primary care managers and reps to infiltrate and destroy another great company and division. Just look at out biologics, HIs and vaccines divisions. Ask any of them. They will tell you what I am telling you. Welcome to GSK where our corporate culture is as toxic as Chernobyl.
     
  9. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    I don’t feel well.
     
  10. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Very surprised by the ODAC vote. 12-0 with 2 abstentions. Given the FDA comments and their presentations it painted a picture that did not seem very promising and still may not be, pending FDA's final decision.

    You can expect a black box warning on ocular tox and the requirement for an eye exam prior to each infusion. REMS is looking like a strong reality. Think back to Promacta but much worse. An entirely new stakeholder has been added into the treatment equation. With Promacta it was an operational hurdle to fill out the paperwork as part of the REMS, this will be a co-ordination nightmare for community oncologists.

    Not sure I see this as the blockbuster drug GSK has touted it as. Given these parameters, I think it is going to extremely difficult to compete in the earlier line setting with so many treatment options; many with much better risk:benefit profiles.

    One opinion, but I now see this as a salvage therapy within a niche population where no other options exist.

    Key will be if the forecasts align with the "new" opportunity. However, knowing GSK and what they've internally planned for this asset, I don't believe that will be the case. Lots of mindset shifts will need to happen around this product.
     
  11. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Well put. Very sound analysis.
     
  12. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    FYI..the 2 that did not vote, they did not abstain. They were not available to vote due to technical difficulties that delayed ODAC 1.5 hours, thus they had to leave before the vote.. 12-0, would have most likely been 14-0 based on the data presented, open line comments and those that voted comments...
     
  13. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    ok Eeyore, whatever you say.