Reply to thread

To be fair, those numbers don't tell the whole truth...in order to be considered "complete cure" by FDA mandated standards, in addition to mycological cure, the nail must have 0% nail involvement (translation: the ugly part of the nail has to be totally grown out).  Considering the average toenail takes 72 weeks to grow out, I think both Jublia and Kerydin's "cure rates" would have more meaning if the patients in the studies would have been followed for longer than 48-52 weeks.  With that in mind, a 10-17% complete cure rate at 12 months makes perfect sense - they work only as fast as the nail can grow and that includes orals like terbinafine and sporanox. Who cares if you're finished with your potentially liver-damaging 3-month course of oral treatment when your nail still looks like shit?  Patients don't give a rat's ass about mycological cure, they care about being able to wear sandals in public...and that's not happening for 12-18 months, regardless of what you use. 


Any halfway decent rep can explain that to a doctor so clinical percentages are no excuse...insurance coverage, however, is another story. 


Btw, Kerydin's whole "boron technology" thing is just ridiculous marketing fluff..."new" doesn't necessarily mean "better", especially considering Jublia's success rates are still higher. Plus, Kerydin can't legally claim being a "new" therapy after being on the market for >6 months, per FDA guidelines.  The ONE advantage over Jublia is that Kerydin allows government-insured patients to take advantage of their patient access program...which is awesome for those patients, but, again, also very illegal.


In my entire territory, Kerydin has ONE doc that writes regularly and they are rapidly losing them to other therapies.