The Biotech Beat: 9.23-9.29.24

by Joey Bose and Aruesha Srivastava

??Upshot

Over the past several months, the biotech and pharmaceutical industries have witnessed a flurry of high-stakes developments, from groundbreaking drug approvals to legal battles and strategic acquisitions ??. Pfizer’s shocking withdrawal of Oxbryta, a $5.4 billion bet in sickle cell disease, underscores the unpredictable nature of drug safety ??, while Amgen’s push to launch Pavblu, a biosimilar to Regeneron’s $5.9 billion blockbuster Eylea, threatens to reshape competition in the eye care market ???. At the same time, cutting-edge therapies like BioAge’s obesity drug azelaprag, paired with Eli Lilly’s tirzepatide, are entering Phase 2 trials, aiming to capitalize on the weight loss boom ??. Meanwhile, AI-driven partnerships, such as Generate' $1 billion deal with Novartis, signal the increasing role of artificial intelligence in drug discovery ??. On the regulatory front, the FDA’s scrutiny of PD-L1 biomarkers could narrow indications for checkpoint inhibitors like Merck’s Keytruda and BMS’s Opdivo, potentially altering their use in cancer treatment ??. Meanwhile, the FTC’s lawsuit against PBMs for inflating insulin prices and Senator Bernie Sanders’ pressure on Novo Nordisk to reduce the cost of Wegovy and Ozempic highlight the growing tension around drug pricing ??. From massive IPOs like CAMP4’s $198 million debut to the legal hurdles facing key industry players, these stories illustrate the high stakes, rapid evolution, and fierce competition driving the future of biotech ??.

?? Research, Development & Drug Approvals ??

?? Zevra Therapeutics Breaks Barriers with Costly NPC Drug, But Will it Deliver?

The Facts

Zevra Therapeutics has received FDA approval for Miplyffa (acriminoclomol), the first therapy targeting Niemann-Pick disease type C (NPC), an ultra-rare and fatal metabolic disorder. NPC, affecting about 1,800 patients in the U.S. and Europe, is a neurodegenerative disease that severely impacts mobility, cognition, and lifespan. Miplyffa, dosed based on weight, will cost between $40,185 and $106,020 per month, translating to over $1 million annually for some patients. Zevra secured rights to the drug in 2022 after Orphazyme's initial FDA rejection and raised $64.5 million to support its launch.

Our Opinion

While the approval of Miplyffa represents a monumental step for NPC patients, the exorbitant cost raises concerns about the accessibility and long-term sustainability of the treatment. Zevra’s drug is groundbreaking for addressing the neurological symptoms of this rare disease, but the financial burden may limit its reach, especially with payers potentially pushing back on coverage. The label’s requirement to use it alongside miglustat—an older drug—adds complexity, and the niche patient population further challenges the commercial viability of this therapy. Balancing clinical innovation with affordability remains a key hurdle in rare disease treatment.

Your Turn

Given the astronomical price tag for Miplyffa, how should healthcare systems and insurers adapt to ensure that patients with rare diseases, like NPC, can access life-saving therapies without further exacerbating health inequality?

?? Biohaven’s Comeback: Will Troriluzole Finally Succeed After FDA Rejection?

The Facts

Biohaven is re-igniting hopes for its experimental drug troriluzole in spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA), a neurodegenerative disease with no FDA-approved treatments. New clinical trial results show that after three years of treatment, troriluzole reduced disease progression by 50% compared to a U.S. external control group and by 70% compared to an EU external group. Despite a previous FDA refusal to review the drug after a failed 48-week placebo-controlled study, Biohaven plans to reapply in Q4 2024, armed with these new results.

Our Opinion

While the extended study results are encouraging, Biohaven’s reliance on real-world evidence instead of a traditional placebo-controlled trial may still raise skepticism from the FDA and other stakeholders. The prolonged trial duration and the commitment of patients reflect the drug’s potential impact, but regulatory bodies may scrutinize the unconventional trial design. Nevertheless, with the dramatic improvement in disease progression and significant unmet needs in SCA, troriluzole could unlock a multi-billion dollar opportunity, though past failures in Alzheimer’s and anxiety may continue to haunt investor confidence.

Your Turn

Given the reliance on real-world evidence and the FDA’s previous refusal, how should regulatory bodies evolve their trial evaluation frameworks to balance innovation with rigorous standards in approving treatments for rare diseases like spinocerebellar ataxia?

?? Amgen’s Immunology Power Play: Rocatinlimab and Uplizna Set to Dominate

The Facts

Amgen has reported impressive results from two pivotal trials, with rocatinlimab showing significant efficacy in atopic dermatitis and Uplizna hitting its primary endpoint in myasthenia gravis. In the Phase 3 ROCKET-Horizon trial, rocatinlimab demonstrated a 75% reduction in eczema severity in 32.8% of patients, far outperforming the placebo at 13.7% after 24 weeks. Uplizna, meanwhile, improved myasthenia gravis symptoms by -4.2 points on the MG-ADL scale, compared to -1.9 points with placebo. With several more trials in progress, Amgen is poised to file for FDA approval well ahead of competitors like Sanofi.

Our Opinion

Amgen's dual success with rocatinlimab and Uplizna reinforces its strategic push into immunology, positioning it as a frontrunner in competitive markets. While the data from these trials are promising, questions remain about long-term safety and efficacy, especially as Sanofi eyes a similar target with amlitelimab. Rocatinlimab's early advantage could help Amgen secure market leadership, but rival products and evolving trial protocols may challenge its dominance. These breakthroughs will be pivotal in shaping the future of biologics in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases.

Your Turn

With Amgen racing ahead of Sanofi in atopic dermatitis, what role should real-world evidence and post-market surveillance play in solidifying the long-term safety and efficacy profiles of breakthrough biologics like rocatinlimab?

?? Biogen and UCB Keep Lupus Trial Data Under Wraps: A Confidence Boost or Cause for Concern?

The Facts

Biogen and UCB have announced that their Phase 3 trial for dapirolizumab pegol in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) met its primary endpoint, showing improvement in disease activity compared to standard of care. The trial, which included 321 patients, also indicated clinical improvements in secondary endpoints. However, the companies withheld detailed data, leaving key metrics such as statistical significance and effect size undisclosed. Despite this, they plan to launch a second pivotal trial by the end of 2024 to confirm the results.

Our Opinion

While Biogen and UCB’s decision to proceed with a second trial signals confidence in dapirolizumab pegol’s potential, the lack of transparency around the data raises questions. Without knowing the magnitude of the benefits or the statistical robustness, it’s hard to gauge whether the trial truly marks a breakthrough in lupus treatment. The cautious optimism could be justified, but investors and the medical community may remain skeptical until more comprehensive data is released. Nevertheless, if successful, this drug could offer hope in a field with limited treatment options for lupus.

Your Turn

Given the incomplete data disclosure and the cautious approach taken by Biogen and UCB, how should investors and stakeholders balance optimism with risk when evaluating the potential success of drugs targeting complex diseases like lupus?

?? Biohaven’s Persistence Pays Off: Troriluzole’s Revival in Spinocerebellar Ataxia

The Facts

Biohaven is on the verge of submitting a new drug application for troriluzole in spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA), a rare neurodegenerative disease with no current FDA-approved treatments. Troriluzole, a prodrug that reduces synaptic glutamate levels, had previously failed in pivotal trials for SCA, Alzheimer’s, and anxiety, leading the FDA to refuse even a review of its SCA data in 2023. However, by leveraging real-world evidence and new analyses over three years, Biohaven demonstrated a significant treatment effect, particularly in patients with SCA type 3, the most common form of the disease.

Our Opinion

Biohaven’s ability to overcome previous setbacks and generate meaningful data using real-world evidence reflects a broader shift in drug approval pathways, especially for rare diseases. This approach could open new doors for drugs previously considered failures, but it also raises questions about the rigor of such evidence compared to traditional randomized controlled trials. The positive results offer renewed hope for SCA patients, but the FDA’s ultimate response will determine whether this unconventional route sets a new precedent or highlights the limitations of real-world data in regulatory decisions.

Your Turn

With the increasing reliance on real-world evidence in drug development, how should regulatory agencies balance the need for innovative trial designs with maintaining the gold standard of randomized controlled trials to ensure patient safety and efficacy?

?? Amgen’s Uplizna Shines Again: Myasthenia Gravis Success Sets Stage for Regulatory Victory

The Facts

Amgen’s Uplizna has achieved a notable victory in a Phase 3 trial for myasthenia gravis (MG), a rare autoimmune disorder affecting muscle control. Patients treated with Uplizna experienced a 4.2-point improvement on the MG-ADL scale after 26 weeks, significantly outpacing the placebo group, which improved by only 2.3 points. Uplizna’s biannual dosing and ability to reduce steroid use enhance its appeal, especially for MG patients struggling with chronic treatment burdens. Regulatory filings are now underway, positioning Uplizna as a serious contender against existing treatments from Argenx and AstraZeneca.

Our Opinion

While Uplizna’s success in MG reinforces Amgen’s dominance in the rare disease space, questions remain about how it will fare in a competitive market alongside heavyweights like Vyvgart and Soliris. Its unique mechanism and favorable dosing schedule may offer advantages, but real-world patient experiences and long-term safety will ultimately determine whether Uplizna can claim a leading position. Furthermore, Amgen’s reliance on rare disease therapies, coupled with Uplizna’s potential expansion into additional indications, will be pivotal to its growth strategy following the Horizon Therapeutics acquisition.

Your Turn

As Uplizna prepares to enter a crowded market for myasthenia gravis, how should healthcare systems evaluate cost-effectiveness and long-term outcomes when comparing new entrants like Uplizna with established treatments like Soliris and Vyvgart?

?? BMS Breaks the Mold with Cobenfy: A New Era for Schizophrenia Treatment

The Facts

Bristol Myers Squibb has introduced Cobenfy, the first novel schizophrenia treatment in decades, marking a significant shift in how the disorder is treated. Unlike older antipsychotics that target dopamine receptors and come with severe side effects, Cobenfy works by blocking muscarinic cholinergic receptors in the brain, reducing psychotic symptoms more effectively and without a black box warning. The drug achieved statistically significant reductions in schizophrenia symptoms during two Phase 3 trials and is set to launch in October at a cost of $1,850 per month.

Our Opinion

Cobenfy’s novel mechanism of action and favorable side effect profile signal a long-overdue advancement in schizophrenia treatment, but its high price and twice-daily dosing may limit its use to patients who don’t respond to generic alternatives. While BMS has a first-mover advantage in this new drug class, competition from AbbVie’s once-daily emraclidine, expected to hit the market by 2025, could challenge its dominance. Still, with the potential for additional approvals in Alzheimer’s-associated psychosis, Cobenfy’s $2 billion sales projection may be just the beginning.

Your Turn

As new schizophrenia treatments like Cobenfy emerge, how should healthcare systems balance the high costs of innovative therapies with ensuring broad access for patients who need more effective options beyond generics?

?? Investment, M&A, and IPOs ??

?? Nucleus Genomics Eyes 23andMe: Will Tech and Data Security Revive the Giant?

The Facts

Nucleus Genomics, a small startup backed by Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund and Alexis Ohanian’s 776 Fund, is considering a public offer to acquire 23andMe, following a year of internal turmoil and declining value for the genetic testing giant. 23andMe’s valuation has plunged from $3.5 billion in 2021 to just $230 million, as its dual identity in genetic testing and therapeutics struggles to gain traction. Nucleus aims to combine its superior technology, which sequences 1,000 times more DNA than 23andMe, with the latter’s broad market reach, emphasizing enhanced data security after a recent hacking incident.

Our Opinion

This potential acquisition could breathe new life into 23andMe, but it raises significant questions about the viability of merging two companies with vastly different scales and financial resources. Nucleus’ claims of superior technology are intriguing, but integrating that with 23andMe’s established brand and consumer base could be challenging. Moreover, the unresolved issue of 23andMe’s therapeutics division, which has faltered in recent years, complicates the picture. While the combination may offer promise, particularly in restoring trust in data security, the outcome will heavily depend on securing financing and addressing the broader strategic missteps that have led to 23andMe’s steep decline.

Your Turn

As Nucleus Genomics considers acquiring 23andMe, how should investors weigh the risks of combining a smaller, tech-focused company with a struggling giant that has been unable to meet the demands of both the consumer and therapeutics markets?

?? CAMP4 Therapeutics Joins the IPO Frenzy: Will RNA Tech Spark Biotech Market Revival?

The Facts

CAMP4 Therapeutics, a biotech startup focusing on regulatory RNAs, has announced plans for an IPO, making it the sixth biotech to file for a public listing in just two weeks. Founded by renowned scientists from the Whitehead Institute and Harvard Medical School, CAMP4 is developing antisense oligonucleotides aimed at treating genetic diseases, with its lead candidate, CMP-CPS-001, currently in Phase 1 trials for urea cycle disorders. The company’s IPO plans follow renewed market optimism after a Federal Reserve interest rate cut, though no specific funding target has been disclosed.

Our Opinion

CAMP4’s IPO timing seems to align with a cautious resurgence in biotech, but its success will hinge on both market conditions and the broader acceptance of RNA-based therapies. While the startup's partnerships with big names like Eli Lilly, Fulcrum, and Biogen add credibility, the sector remains volatile, and CAMP4’s early-stage pipeline may face challenges in generating short-term investor confidence. Nevertheless, its focus on the emerging field of regulatory RNA could position it well for long-term growth, provided it can sustain momentum in a competitive landscape.

Your Turn

As biotech companies rush to go public amid a slight market uptick, how should investors assess the viability of early-stage RNA technology platforms like CAMP4, especially in light of past fluctuations in biotech market sentiment?

?? Generateand Novartis Join Forces: Can AI-Driven Protein Therapies Deliver?

The Facts

Generatehas secured a lucrative deal with Novartis, including $50 million in cash and $15 million in equity, to develop AI-driven protein therapies. The partnership, which could lead to over $1 billion in milestone payments, adds to a growing trend of pharma giants embracing AI in drug development. Generate’s pipeline, nearing 20 programs, includes two clinical-stage drugs targeting COVID-19 and asthma, with early data from its TSLP antibody showing a 20-fold improvement in binding over existing treatments. The company now boasts over $350 million in cash, with an IPO possibly on the horizon.

Our Opinion

While this partnership underscores the increasing role of AI in biotech, the true test for Generate will be translating its AI-designed molecules into real clinical benefits. The promise of more efficient drug development with better-targeted therapies is exciting, but skepticism remains about whether these AI-optimized therapies can outperform existing options in the highly competitive protein therapeutics space. Still, with strong financial backing and a robust pipeline, Generate is well-positioned to lead the AI revolution in biopharma if its early successes hold up in larger trials.

Your Turn

As AI continues to transform drug discovery, how should pharma companies balance the excitement of early AI-driven breakthroughs with the need for long-term clinical data to prove their value over traditional methods?

?? Fed’s Rate Cut Offers Biotech a Lifeline, But Will It Be Enough?

The Facts

The Federal Reserve’s decision to lower interest rates by 50 bps (half a percentage point), now targeting 4.75% to 5%, has injected optimism into the struggling biotech sector. Historically, lower rates benefit riskier markets like biotech, where startups require patient capital to bring drugs to market. Industry insiders predict a rebound in biotech funding, including IPOs and venture capital, following this rate cut. Exchange-traded funds tracking biotech stocks have already reacted positively, but broader economic concerns, such as the U.S. presidential election, could still dampen the sector’s recovery.

Our Opinion

While the rate cut may help revive biotech funding, it won’t solve the structural challenges plaguing the industry, from slow dealmaking to a lingering wave of layoffs. Biotech companies are still highly reliant on investor patience, and even with lower rates, the sector remains a risky bet with long development timelines and frequent failures. The real question is whether this rate cut will be enough to drive sustained investment or if broader market conditions will continue to hinder the sector's growth.

Your Turn

As the biotech sector begins to recover from the downturn, how should investors approach balancing the potential rewards of biotech investments against the ongoing macroeconomic risks, such as election uncertainty and global market volatility?

?? Novartis Bets Big on AI-Driven Protein Therapies in $1B+ Deal with Generate

The Facts

Novartis has struck a deal worth over $1 billion with Generateto develop novel protein therapeutics using its cutting-edge generative AI platform. The deal includes $65 million upfront, with potential milestone payments exceeding $1 billion, plus royalties. This multi-target collaboration leverages Generate’s AI-powered biology platform to accelerate drug discovery across various disease areas. With two clinical-stage programs already underway, Generate’s rapidly expanding pipeline positions it as a major player in AI-driven biotech innovation.

Our Opinion

This partnership exemplifies Big Pharma’s growing reliance on AI to speed up drug development and tackle unmet medical needs. While the scale of the deal underscores confidence in Generate’s technology, the lack of disclosed disease targets raises questions about the immediate impact on patients. AI’s promise in biotech is clear, but as the race to develop programmable biology intensifies, Novartis and Generate will need to prove that their combined capabilities can consistently deliver breakthrough therapies faster and more efficiently than traditional methods.

Your Turn

As AI-driven drug discovery becomes more central to biotech, how should companies balance the rapid pace of innovation with the need for thorough clinical validation to ensure long-term success and patient safety?

?? BioAge Labs Taps Into Weight Loss Boom with $198M IPO: Can It Compete with Big Pharma?

The Facts

BioAge Labs, originally an anti-aging biotech, has launched a $198 million IPO under the ticker $BIOA, upsizing its offering to 11 million shares at $18 each. The startup has repurposed an Amgen heart failure drug, azelaprag, for weight loss, and entered Phase 2 trials in combination with Eli Lilly’s tirzepatide. BioAge is leveraging its cash position of $159 million and aiming to capitalize on the surging interest in next-generation obesity therapies pioneered by Novo Nordisk and Lilly.

Our Opinion

BioAge’s pivot from heart failure to obesity and its strategic partnerships with industry leaders reflect the growing momentum in the weight loss space. However, competing with giants like Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk presents significant challenges, particularly for a smaller player with fewer resources. While the company’s recent IPO positions it well for future trials, its success will depend on whether its combination therapies can deliver superior efficacy in a crowded market of promising obesity drugs.

Your Turn

As smaller biotechs like BioAge enter the highly competitive weight loss market, how should investors evaluate the risks and rewards of backing emerging therapies versus established leaders like Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, whose drugs already dominate the space?

?? Politics & Policy ???

?? FTC Takes Aim at PBMs Over Insulin Price Hikes: Will Patients Finally See Relief?

The Facts

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is suing major pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) Optum Rx, Express Scripts, and Caremark for allegedly engaging in anticompetitive practices that have driven up insulin prices. The complaint claims these PBMs manipulated drug formularies to prioritize high-rebate insulins, forcing vulnerable diabetic patients to pay more out-of-pocket. While PBMs argue they’ve reduced insulin costs in recent years, the FTC’s lawsuit could be the first step in reshaping how insulin—and potentially other drugs—are priced and distributed across the U.S. healthcare system.

Our Opinion

This legal action marks a significant escalation in the fight against PBMs, whose complex role in drug pricing has long been criticized for inflating costs. However, while the lawsuit targets PBMs, the FTC’s investigation of insulin manufacturers like Eli Lilly hints that more players may be held accountable. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications, not only for insulin but for the entire pharmaceutical supply chain. Yet, with both PBMs and drugmakers entrenched in the system, real change may still face significant resistance from entrenched interests.

Your Turn

As the FTC moves forward with its lawsuit, how should healthcare systems and policymakers balance the need for accountability in the pharmaceutical supply chain with ensuring that reforms don't unintentionally reduce access to life-saving medications like insulin?

??? Novo Nordisk Under Fire: Will PBM Agreements Lead to Price Cuts for Wegovy and Ozempic?

The Facts

During a Senate hearing, Sen. Bernie Sanders challenged Novo Nordisk CEO Lars Fruergaard J?rgensen to lower the list prices of blockbuster drugs Wegovy and Ozempic, citing agreements with three major PBMs—UnitedHealth/Optum Rx, Cigna/Express Scripts, and CVS Caremark—not to restrict formulary placement if prices are reduced. Despite Sanders’ claims, J?rgensen remained hesitant, citing concerns over PBM motivations and the complexities of pricing negotiations. Meanwhile, lawmakers are pushing HHS to allow generic competition under U.S. Code 1498, amplifying the pressure on Novo.

Our Opinion

While the agreements with PBMs signal a potential breakthrough in reducing the prices of life-changing medications, the lack of commitment from Novo Nordisk reflects the deep-rooted complexities of the U.S. drug pricing system. PBMs, often blamed for driving up list prices, could be pivotal in lowering patient costs, but without clear, enforceable terms, the burden may still fall on patients. Additionally, the push for generics could upend the market, further complicating pricing strategies for branded drugs like Wegovy and Ozempic.

Your Turn

As Novo Nordisk faces mounting pressure from both lawmakers and PBMs, how should pharmaceutical companies balance the need to maintain profitability with the growing calls for price reductions and generic competition, particularly for high-demand drugs?

?? FDA Weighs Narrower Indications for Keytruda and Opdivo: Will Biomarkers Limit Access?

The Facts

The FDA’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee is debating whether Merck’s Keytruda and Bristol Myers Squibb’s Opdivo should come with more restricted indications in gastric adenocarcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma based on PD-L1 biomarker levels. While both drugs are currently approved without regard to PD-L1 expression, the FDA is concerned that patients with low or no PD-L1 expression may face greater risks without corresponding benefits. Both Merck and Bristol Myers argue against changing the labels, citing potential harm from limiting patient access to these treatments.

Our Opinion

This potential shift in label indications highlights the growing importance of biomarkers in cancer treatment but also raises concerns about restricting access to life-saving therapies. While PD-L1 testing may enhance precision medicine, excluding patients based solely on these biomarkers could deny effective treatments to those who might benefit. As the FDA moves toward more biomarker-driven decisions, the balance between patient safety and access to cutting-edge therapies becomes more critical.

Your Turn

With increasing reliance on biomarkers like PD-L1 in cancer treatment, how should regulatory bodies weigh the risks of excluding patients from therapies versus the potential for improved safety and efficacy through more targeted treatments?

?? Regeneron’s Eylea Faces Biosimilar Threat: Will Amgen Risk an Early Launch?

The Facts

Regeneron’s stock dropped 5% after a judge denied its request to block Amgen from launching Pavblu, a biosimilar of its blockbuster eye drug Eylea. Despite Regeneron’s appeal, Amgen now has the option to launch the biosimilar "at risk" while the patent litigation continues. Eylea, which generated $5.9 billion in sales in 2023, is Regeneron’s top-selling drug, and Pavblu could disrupt the market, particularly the low-dose version that makes up 80% of sales. However, analysts are split on whether Amgen will risk launching the biosimilar early, given the financial risks.

Our Opinion

This legal setback represents a significant challenge for Regeneron as it faces mounting biosimilar competition. While the company has focused on shifting patients to a higher-dose formulation with longer patent protection, the potential early entry of Pavblu could erode market share faster than anticipated. Amgen’s strategic decision on whether to launch Pavblu at risk will be closely watched, as it could set a precedent for biosimilar strategies in high-stakes markets like ophthalmology.

Your Turn

As biosimilars increasingly enter the market, how should pharmaceutical companies like Regeneron adapt their business strategies to maintain profitability and market share, especially when facing early competition from well-funded rivals like Amgen?

?? Pfizer Withdraws Sickle Cell Drug Oxbryta After Fatalities: A $5.4 Billion Bet Gone Wrong?

The Facts

Pfizer has announced it will withdraw its sickle cell disease treatment Oxbryta from global markets following concerning trial data showing an “imbalance” in fatalities and complications. The drug, acquired through Pfizer’s $5.4 billion purchase of Global Blood Therapeutics in 2022, was once seen as a cornerstone of the company’s rare disease strategy. However, patient deaths in clinical trials, including eight in a high-risk stroke study, led Pfizer to halt all active trials and expanded access programs. Oxbryta had generated $328 million in sales in 2023, but its future is now in doubt.

Our Opinion

This decision is a significant blow to Pfizer’s rare disease ambitions, particularly as the acquisition of Oxbryta was meant to strengthen its hematology portfolio. The emergence of newer gene therapies for sickle cell disease, combined with Oxbryta’s safety concerns, raises questions about the long-term viability of this market for traditional drugs. While regulators continue to investigate the causes of these fatalities, Pfizer’s rapid withdrawal signals the immense challenges and risks in developing therapies for complex diseases like sickle cell.

Your Turn

As gene therapies gain traction in the treatment of sickle cell disease, how should companies like Pfizer reassess their investment strategies in light of safety concerns surrounding older drugs like Oxbryta?

If you enjoyed this article, be sure to subscribe and follow Joey Bose!

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are not to be construed with investment advice. The information presented in this article is a compilation of current events, technical analyses, corporate press releases, and the author's personal viewpoints about the biotechnology industry. While efforts have been made to provide accurate and timely information, there may be inadvertent errors, omissions, or inaccuracies. Therefore, investment decisions should not be made solely based on the content of this article. The article may contain statements that are forward-looking in nature, encompassing predictions and future expectations that are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties; as such, actual outcomes may significantly deviate from those expressed or implied herein. This article serves purely as an informational and entertainment resource, and should not be construed as an endorsement to purchase or sell any financial securities. Prior to engaging in any investment activities, it is imperative that you conduct comprehensive due diligence and consult with a qualified financial advisor.