Genentech has a huge problem with their credibility

Implications: Genentech should have voluntarily compared Lucentis with Avastin.

All of Genentech's efforts to promote Lucentis seem self serving and insincere.


Analysis: Genentech has unfortunately looked very pathetic in these past several months.
Their initial, huge error in judgement was that Avastin was not a potential candidate for intravitreal use in neovascular AMD and diabetic macular edema.

Following the ever-increasing accumulation of evidence to the contrary however...the fact that they were not willing to orchestrate a much needed study to compare Avastin with Lucentis...and just rather kept trying to push Lucentis and negate what was a very rapidly developing worldwide trend for Avastin use...made them look even worse...and untrustworthy and sadly self-serving.
The fact that the NEI now essentially had to step in and commence this much needed trial...makes them likewise look like a very second rate outfit.

Their own vice president responsible for Lucentis (Quentin...) was even quoted at the most recent ASRS as vowing to block the world wide use of Avastin...and said (personal communication) that he would attempt to stop the supply of Avastin to any compounding pharmacy who supplied Avastin to retinal surgeons....

In the end...when the results of the above NEI study are released...I suspect Lucentis will be finished....the difference in price ($24K versus approximately $100 per year) coupled with the difference in injection frequency (monthly versus perhaps 3 to 4 injections in the first year) are so large that it will not be enough to show that Lucentis is superior (which it likely is not)...it would be necessary to show that it is MUCH better than Avastin to justify the difference in cost and required frequency of injection...the likelihood of this happening is ZERO...

Very interesting times indeed.