Comment by jjmarr
5 hours ago
The suggestions on making sustainable cures:
“Solution 1: Address large markets: Hemophilia is a $9-10bn WW market (hemophilia A, B), growing at ~6-7% annually.”
“Solution 2: Address disorders with high incidence: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) affects the cells (neurons) in the spinal cord, impacting the ability to walk, eat, or breathe.”
“Solution 3: Constant innovation and portfolio expansion: There are hundreds of inherited retinal diseases (genetics forms of blindness) … Pace of innovation will also play a role as future programs can offset the declining revenue trajectory of prior assets.”
It's easy to handwave "capitalism makes curing patients unsustainable" but here we have three strategies for sustainable cures that have a positive impact on society.
e.g. Curing blind children is profitable, since there's so many genetic reasons a child would be blind that you can keep introducing new cures reapplying the same technology.
Re (1), cure renal disease and save the US alone $30B/year.
Curing blind children is profitable. If cured, they will likely have more children. Surely some of their children will also be blind, so the company profits will increase.
It's a long term investment.
Obviously a hemophilia cure is a bad investment, recurring lifelong hemophilia treatment is very much more attractive.