Evotec 566480, wohin geht die Reise??? (Seite 6639)

[freiwilder]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 41.775.102 von spero am 12.07.11 10:55:42

Spero,
schau dir doch mal sämtliche anderen Kurse an! Scheint so als ob eine Finanzkrise da wäre

[spero]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 41.774.777 von Ackergaul am 12.07.11 10:10:02

Was mein Englisch da herausliest: Wir sind bei EVO offensichtlich gut für die Zukunft investiert.

Ne ganz andere Frage: Gibt es einen vernünftigen oder nachvollziehbaren Grund, weshalb der EVO-Kurs so heftig auf die Irritation der Finanzmärkte reagiert ? Hat das was mit dem € zu tun ???

Eigentlich bin ich nur an ernst gemeinten Antworten interessiert, aber ich hab auch nichts gegen außer- und unterirdische Erklärungsversuche.

spero

[Ackergaul]

"Netter" Wochenauftakt... Bin mal gespannt ob bzw. wann sich Spanien zu Wort melden muss. Aber zurück zum Thema. Habe einen sehr interessanten Bereicht gefunden:
http://www.scripintelligence.com/multimedia/archive/00123/Bi…
SCRIP Intelligence
Biomarkers and beyond
Drivers of growth in the companion
diagnostics market
Interview transcript (16 February 2011)
Dr Peter Charlish, Scrip Principal Analyst
Rebecca Debens, Editorial Coordinator, Scrip Intelligence
[0:00]
RD: Here today is Scrip Principal Analyst Peter Charlish, author of a new
companion diagnostic analysis. Peter why is this such a hot topic?
PC: Weil a number of reasons really. I think basically companion
diagnostics is a technology whose time has come.
A number of things have come together to favour its emergence.
One of them is technological changes: there have been a lot of
developments in areas such as pharmacogenomics, particularly in
identification of biomarkers recently, and greater understanding of
how those processes relate to how a patient responds to a drug. Now's
the time when it's an achievable and desirable thing.
A number of other reasons and factors are involved as well- the
pharmaceutical companies, we keep hearing about the end of the
blockbuster era and certainly there don't seem to be any major
blockbusters coming through pipelines at the moment. so pharma
companies are really trying to find new ways of maximising the returns
on their investment in R&D. One of the ways of doing that is to try
to be able to identify better patients who are going to respond to a
particular drug, and if you can give a greater assurance that your drug
is going to be effective, you can charge a higher price for It perhaps, so
there's a business factor involved as well.
And then there are other factors involved. One that particularly comes
to mind is the U5 FDA's Critical Path Initiative, which was set up originally
in 2004 to try to accelerate the process of product development in
pharmaceuticals and medical devices and so on. And one of the areas
that they highlighted was biomarkers and how they relate to drug
effectiveness, so that's given the whole field a stimulus as well.
And lastly I think its time has come in the sense that people have
realised there are a number of benefits that can be gained from using
companion diagnostics with a particular drug. You can identify patients
perhaps who are going to be particularly at risk of side-effects, or
maybe consider using an alternative treatment as appropriate. As I said
you can identify people who are more likely to res pond to a particular
drug and you can use these tests far monitoring the ongoing
treatment of patients and that sort of thing as well.
[03:00]
RD: What are the challenges facing pharma and diagnostic companies
when collaborating together?
PC: Weil, for all that there are a lot of advantages for pharma and
diagnostic companies to work together, there are a number of issues
that need to be addressed and in a way it boils down to a bit of dash
of cultures.
If you think about it, a pharmaceutical product takes 10 years or
more to develop.1 don't know what the latest figure is far the cost
but it's hundreds of millions of dollars certainly. All sorts of regulatory
hurdles that need to be gone through.
Diagnostic products, in comparison, can be developed very quickly,
the lifecycle for diagnostic products is usually measured in terms of
a couple of years, sometimes even shorter because the technology
evolves so quickly and tests become mare sensitive so they're quickly
replaced.
So on one hand you have pharma companies who are spending
10 years developing a product and if you want to have a companion
diagnostic to go with It, a diagnostic company is not used to thinking
in terms of 1 0 years - so how does it plan its collaboration, how do
the two come together, when do they get together? So there's a bit of
a challenge there.
Then you have the question of intellectual property - who owns the IP
on the pharmaceutical or the diagnostic? Are they sold together or is it just
one product? What about trademarks and so on? All these things arise.
There are also the different approaches to regulation - again,
pharmaceutical companies are used to quite a long process by which
they get products approved through the regulatory agencies. Diagnostics
companies - they don't have that at the moment very much, so there's a
different way of thinking there that has to be addressed.
Another issue I suppose they have to think about together is pricing.
Pharmaceuticals and diagnostics are priced completely differently, for
each target audience that is different. So there's this question of how
you put them together in a package at the right price which is going
to attract both the doctors and the people who carry out the tests and
the people who pay for it.
[05:40]
RD: What are the trends in recent pharma and diagnostic company deals?
PC: Weil in the analysis I've Just done I looked at major deals over the
past four years or so, and a couple of things struck me about them.
First of all, deals tend to be done increasingly early in the development
phase. I think some of the first companion diagnostics came along
once the pharmaceutical product was ready to market, whereas now
there is a much greater trend for companies to work together, so they
must get round those issues I was just talking about.
But you can certainly see from looking at the recent deals that they
work together and the input from the diagnostics companies in terms
of measuring biomarkers and the significance of that is assuming
greater importance.
The other thing I noticed from looking at what's going on recently is
almost all the deals that I looked at in the last four years or so were in
the oncology area and I think, up to now, companion diagnostics have
been not exclusively but largely confined to the oncology area. There are
a number of reasons for that - some of the newer oncology drugs are
very expensive so it's important to identify patients who are going to get
some benefit from them, so that probably gave them a boost in that area.
But there are same deals in other areas as well- there certainly
seems to be a lot of deal activity, and it seems to be accelerating, we're
only in February at the moment and we've already had one major deal
this year between MDx Health and Pfizer - MDx is going to identify
and develop biomarkers for Pfizer for use with its anticancer products.
[08:00]
RD: What is the current regulatory environment for co-developed drugs
and diagnostics?
PC: Weil I think generally, if you're talking about companion
diagnostics, the regulatory aspects, there's not a lot at the moment. In
the US, for example, the Critical Path Initiative, as I mentioned before,
focused attention on pharmacogenomic markers, far patients who
would be responders to a particular drug, far example, and the FDA
issued same guidance, a concept paper an drug diagnostics and
development, in 2005, and that goes into a number of different issues
that arise. And that hasn't really been superseded.
There is supposed to be formal guidance on co-development
sometime this year but the timetable for that is not c1ear. So at the
moment it's still basically the traditional regulatory approval route
for pharmaceuticals and the traditional routes of approval far in vitro
diagnostics in the U5, which are classified according to the risk.
[09:30]
RD: And what about in Europe?
PC: In Europe again there's currently no specific regulation or guidance
about companion diagnostics. Currently most, although not all, in
vitro diagnostics don't require any third-party certification; the onus
is on the manufacturer to affirm that they comply with the essential
requirements, and then that's pretty much all they need to do,
although of course there are some exceptions to that.
But that's probably going to change over the next few years - there's
a revised in vitro diagnostics directive on the way and although it's not
c1ear yet what impact that's going to have, it seems that the authorities
have been looking at more of a risk-stratified strategy, possibly
adopting the classification used by the Global Harmonisation Taskforce,
so that might change the way in which companion diagnostics are
looked at in Europe. Certainly, it will change, although it's not quite
c1ear yet how it will change, but of course the follow-on from that
is that will create new issues for pharma companies and diagnostics
companies to adapt to the new situation and change their way of
working together, perhaps.
[11 :00]
RD: What's driving the market forward?
PC: Well I think the things that I've mentioned really. It's a technology that
has clear benefits to the patients. lf you can identify if they're going to
respond to a particular drug then that avoids the risk and the expense of
being treated with a drug which isn't going to work. There are benefits for
third-party payers because they are only paying far the treatments that
are effective. There are benefits far pharmaceutical companies. As I said
if you can identify patients who are going to respond to your drug, you
could make your clinical trials much more efficient.
So there are all sorts of benefits to be gained from this technology,
and I think that as much as anything is what's going to drive it forward.
There are still same hurdles to be surmounted, but I'm sure they will
be. It's an evolving scene and it's going to be interesting to see how
things evolve in the future.


Grüße

[freiwilder]

Diese Woche gibt es noch Aktien zum Schnäppchenpreis.

[freiwilder]

2,36 Euro

[freiwilder]

Sorry. Wer lesen kann ist klar im Vorteil

http://www.evotec.com/article/de/Allianzen-Projekte/EVT-101-…

[freiwilder]

Kann mir jemand von euch sagen ob EVT103 im Zuge von EVT101 auch eingestellt worden ist?

[freiwilder]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 41.764.986 von ciel34 am 09.07.11 08:03:34

2,50 EURO

[ciel34]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 41.762.026 von spero am 08.07.11 14:08:01

müssen sie natürlich nicht. nichts muss sein.

[spero]

Evotec schließt Allianz mit belgischem Pharmakonzern UCB
Die Hamburger Biotechfirma Evotec verbündet sich bei der Erforschung neuer Medikamente mit dem belgischen Pharmakonzern UCB. Beide Unternehmen wollen in den kommenden drei Jahren zusammen nach Wirkstoffen für die Behandlung von Erkrankungen ...

... heute nachzulesen im Hamburger Abendblatt. Für uns nicht neu, aber bemerkenswert ist, dass die EVO-News von Norddeutschlands führender Tageszeitung inzwischen wenigstens wahrgenommen werden. Das war vor einiger Zeit noch nicht so.

Nächste ernstzunehmende Hürde sind die 2,80. Aber da müssen mindestens noch eine oder eherzwei so schöne Meldungen her.

spero