<code id='78715390DA'></code><style id='78715390DA'></style>
    • <acronym id='78715390DA'></acronym>
      <center id='78715390DA'><center id='78715390DA'><tfoot id='78715390DA'></tfoot></center><abbr id='78715390DA'><dir id='78715390DA'><tfoot id='78715390DA'></tfoot><noframes id='78715390DA'>

    • <optgroup id='78715390DA'><strike id='78715390DA'><sup id='78715390DA'></sup></strike><code id='78715390DA'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='78715390DA'><label id='78715390DA'><select id='78715390DA'><dt id='78715390DA'><span id='78715390DA'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='78715390DA'></u>
          <i id='78715390DA'><strike id='78715390DA'><tt id='78715390DA'><pre id='78715390DA'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          Home / comprehensive / explore

          explore


          explore

          author:hotspot    Page View:82883
          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