<code id='CD48AEED66'></code><style id='CD48AEED66'></style>
    • <acronym id='CD48AEED66'></acronym>
      <center id='CD48AEED66'><center id='CD48AEED66'><tfoot id='CD48AEED66'></tfoot></center><abbr id='CD48AEED66'><dir id='CD48AEED66'><tfoot id='CD48AEED66'></tfoot><noframes id='CD48AEED66'>

    • <optgroup id='CD48AEED66'><strike id='CD48AEED66'><sup id='CD48AEED66'></sup></strike><code id='CD48AEED66'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='CD48AEED66'><label id='CD48AEED66'><select id='CD48AEED66'><dt id='CD48AEED66'><span id='CD48AEED66'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='CD48AEED66'></u>
          <i id='CD48AEED66'><strike id='CD48AEED66'><tt id='CD48AEED66'><pre id='CD48AEED66'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          Home / hotspot / hotspot

          hotspot


          hotspot

          author:knowledge    Page View:87
          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