<code id='FFE638BD86'></code><style id='FFE638BD86'></style>
    • <acronym id='FFE638BD86'></acronym>
      <center id='FFE638BD86'><center id='FFE638BD86'><tfoot id='FFE638BD86'></tfoot></center><abbr id='FFE638BD86'><dir id='FFE638BD86'><tfoot id='FFE638BD86'></tfoot><noframes id='FFE638BD86'>

    • <optgroup id='FFE638BD86'><strike id='FFE638BD86'><sup id='FFE638BD86'></sup></strike><code id='FFE638BD86'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='FFE638BD86'><label id='FFE638BD86'><select id='FFE638BD86'><dt id='FFE638BD86'><span id='FFE638BD86'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='FFE638BD86'></u>
          <i id='FFE638BD86'><strike id='FFE638BD86'><tt id='FFE638BD86'><pre id='FFE638BD86'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          Home / hotspot / explore

          explore


          explore

          author:explore    Page View:379
          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