1. Lilly says its monoclonal antibody prevented COVID-19 infections in trial — Roche gets priority review on blockbuster IPF drug — California says batch of Moderna vaccine is safe, despite reports of illnesses — See more on our front page news Stay updated with the latest pharma-related coronavirus news on our new page
    Dismiss Notice

Latest News - ADU won't be approved

Discussion in 'BiogenIdec' started by anonymous, Oct 19, 2020 at 9:26 AM.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    They are hyping it because it’s the last bullet they have. After that, all you have with any run way is your SMA drug. Your stick price is going to crater over the next 6-12 months.

    Neuroscience R&D is super tough. When that’s all your company does, the risk of flaming out is pretty high.
     

  2. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    RBC Capital Markets analyst Brian Abrahams is representative of those with a neutral view of the stock. On Friday, he hosted a mock advisory committee deliberation with his own panel of neurology experts. After reviewing the available data on the Biogen treatment, the group voted 7 to 1 that they weren’t convinced of aducanumab’s effectiveness. The RBC consultants found the drug’s clinical benefits hard to discern, Abrahams said in a Monday note, and they were dubious of the success that Biogen claimed in its post-hoc analysis. After discussing safety questions, the RBC consultants voted 6 to 2 against approval.
     
  3. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    This is because the data is nonexistent and shows really very very very weak efficacy. Do you put your parent through this? If they have patients that say positive things, it is a placebo effect as they were seen regularly and cared for. Analysts have looked at the data and it is unconscionable to approve.
     
  4. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Agreed. I just hope the company does the right thing and provides severance packages for those affected.
     
  5. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

  6. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

  7. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Frankly it was irresponsible to hire all of us with such a low probability of approval. Of course they were able to keep the stock price up while all this is going on which was part of the end game. Good luck to all! The worst part of this is the fact that a drug desperate needed isn’t going to come anytime soon
     
  8. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    You hit the nail on the head. They know it hasn't got a rat's chance of approval, yet this is a common tactic to keep stock price up (salaries paying now is a small price to pay TRUTH) and also keep Biogen's name in the mix. Truth be told, the advisory counsel would be truly irresponsible to the whole medical community to approve with such little and uncompelling data. This is yet another example of corporate greed. With all this said, they better have a plan to take care of people they let go, otherwise they will be the most heartless company of all.
     
  9. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    I GUARANTEE their plan is to just let the people go with minimal severance and Cobra insurance- Biogen is known as one of the least caring companies in the industry when it comes to employees
     
  10. anonymous

    anonymous Guest


    Really? That sucks. I hope that isn't the case as I have a family to support.
     
  11. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    That sucks. I’m sure you knew this prior to accepting this job - it was a huge risk from the beginning. Biogen has had multiple layoffs throughout the years with minimal severance,and that was with tenured employees.
     
  12. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Didn’t you people do any research before taking this job? Oops! It helps to understand science and data.
     
  13. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Don't blame it on the employees and get off your high horse, you moron. Approvals these days are a crap shoot and sometimes you take a chance. Earlier this year, it seemed as if Biogen had extra data they were pulling from their pocket which many didn't get to see. That ended up not being the case and the resulting efficacy data ended up being very subpar. If indeed the FDA says no, Directors, Managers, and the very latest hires, sales, will be the most at risk.
     
  14. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Up till about 10 days ago, I thought there was a chance. Drug wont get approved based on what information has been passed on to me. This isn't bullshit either. I'm mad and upset but not surprised with this nutty 2020. I think it would be wise to update resume and put feelers out there. It has gone quiet for a reason.
     
  15. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Totally agree! Would like to get the severance package while sliding into a new gig right away...$$$$$$$
     
  16. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Approvals are “a crap shoot” when you have multiple
    Positive pivotal trials. They are a fool’s errand when you only have positive results in a single trial after the fact as you slice and dice the data.That is how statistics works; you have to call your shot BEFORE you see the data.

    It was worth a Hail Mary from management’s perspective, but to leave another position to take a job here on the AD team was bat shlt crazy.
     
  17. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    They knew the risks. Me and Never Getting Approved guy have been warning you for 6 months.
     
  18. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Can you imagine how many physicians, hospitals, centers will be so pissed for wasting their time? Conditioning the marketplace hurts everyone. If only they would just wait till approval.
     
  19. anonymous

    anonymous Guest

    Right on. It is the boy who cried wolf. The next time around, people will even be significantly more less likely to talk to us. They will say don't bother until you have an approved product! You have wasted my time and my staff's time.