<code id='1320862B30'></code><style id='1320862B30'></style>
    • <acronym id='1320862B30'></acronym>
      <center id='1320862B30'><center id='1320862B30'><tfoot id='1320862B30'></tfoot></center><abbr id='1320862B30'><dir id='1320862B30'><tfoot id='1320862B30'></tfoot><noframes id='1320862B30'>

    • <optgroup id='1320862B30'><strike id='1320862B30'><sup id='1320862B30'></sup></strike><code id='1320862B30'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='1320862B30'><label id='1320862B30'><select id='1320862B30'><dt id='1320862B30'><span id='1320862B30'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='1320862B30'></u>
          <i id='1320862B30'><strike id='1320862B30'><tt id='1320862B30'><pre id='1320862B30'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          Home / hotspot / hotspot

          hotspot


          hotspot

          author:hotspot    Page View:13149
          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