<code id='55EC47148F'></code><style id='55EC47148F'></style>
    • <acronym id='55EC47148F'></acronym>
      <center id='55EC47148F'><center id='55EC47148F'><tfoot id='55EC47148F'></tfoot></center><abbr id='55EC47148F'><dir id='55EC47148F'><tfoot id='55EC47148F'></tfoot><noframes id='55EC47148F'>

    • <optgroup id='55EC47148F'><strike id='55EC47148F'><sup id='55EC47148F'></sup></strike><code id='55EC47148F'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='55EC47148F'><label id='55EC47148F'><select id='55EC47148F'><dt id='55EC47148F'><span id='55EC47148F'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='55EC47148F'></u>
          <i id='55EC47148F'><strike id='55EC47148F'><tt id='55EC47148F'><pre id='55EC47148F'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          Home / fashion / leisure time

          leisure time


          leisure time

          author:knowledge    Page View:5
          Adam's take main illustration
          Molly Ferguson/STAT

          The approval Friday of Bluebird Bio’s gene therapy for sickle cell disease should have been a momentum-swinging achievement for the long-struggling biotech. Instead, the company mispriced its new drug and fumbled a pivotal financial lifeline.

          The consequences of these strategic blunders — arguably, self-inflicted — could imperil Bluebird’s independence, perhaps even its survival.

          advertisement

          Bluebird priced Lyfgenia at $3.1 million, while Vertex Pharmaceutical set the cost of Casgevy, its competing sickle cell treatment also approved on Friday, at $2.2 million. Not only is Lyfgenia significantly more expensive, but its prescribing label carries a “black box” safety warning, which requires patients undergo regular blood monitoring for cancer risk. Casgevy has no similar monitoring requirement.

          Get unlimited access to award-winning journalism and exclusive events.

          Subscribe Log In