MSB 1.34% $1.51 mesoblast limited

Cell Therapy News/Articles, page-11207

  1. 1,485 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 3293

    I'm finding this particular FDA process fascinating, both from a public healthcare policy & administration perspective. Yeah, bit of a dry biscuit, but my cup of tea.

    In a practical sense, panel voting outcomes of an FDA adcom session are usually binary (agree/ disagree) on any given question. Yet here, the basic agenda indicates that presentations will be delivered at FDA's request on data derived from sources that FDA (as the relevant agency) hasn't scrutinised to its satisfaction, either because its too 'hot off the presses' or was derived in other countries and conditions, or a combination of both. The reason given by the FDA for the meeting is:

    " The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee will convene on September 17, 2020, to discuss whether the data presented by Pfizer support the safety and effectiveness of a boosterdose of COMIRNATY administered 6 months post primary vaccination series."

    (see https://www.fda.gov/media/152176/download)

    So, all FDA wants is for the Committee to "discuss" stuff. Ordinarily, an adcom wouldn't be asked to consider such 'unsettled' information/ data as is being tendered here, apart from any late-received data from the sponsor itself (Pfizer). So, why is the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) being asked to convene and just 'discuss' now? The answer seems to me to be the overriding political and public sector administration drivers.

    Marion Gruber (just tendered notice of her resignation to FDA, has co-authored with Phil Krause (just-resigned FDA vaccine admin guru) a paper published 13 September in The Lancet critiquing the perception of a need for boosters (see https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02046-8/fulltext) & widely considered one of the key vaccine administrators in the USA) is making the introductions to the meeting for the FDA.

    Wow. Grab the popcorn.

    If VRBPAC do overwhelmingly endorse the use of the Pfizer booster, the FDA will have to decide whether to do a 'reverse Aduhelm' & issue Pfizer a CRL. If FDA simply rollover & approve the booster, Pfizer makes a shitload more money, the White House gets vindication and drags the FDA onto its political defence team (against its wishes). But if FDA instead issue a CRL, and more people die from C-19 related illnesses than 'should' or 'would', those deaths will be pinned directly on the current FDA administration by the media and the White House. Remember Krause & Gruber have resigned, so they won't have to carry the can. The White House has the perfect escape from its stupidly out of place prior comments on boosters & can just point to the FDA. Janet Woodcock will fly out the window at that point. Brinksmanship.

    If VRBPAC don't overwhelmingly endorse the use of the Pfizer booster, even more murk may hit the fan (from a public healthcare perspective) because FDA will then have the ammunition to justify issue of a CRL to Pfizer. If they do that, and more people die from C-19 related illnesses then it may still be pinned directly on the current FDA administration by the court of popular opinion, BUT the White House will not have the clear cut support for its political involvement in the process.

    However, this is where the politics starts to get really intense - like, USA intense. Despite a VRBPAC non-overwhelming endorsement, FDA may still choose NOT to issue a CRL to Pfizer, and give them the approval. That would be a damning slap in the face for the FDA's Gruber and Krause, the usual FDA processes, and those supporting the view published in The Lancet. But it might not hurt Janet Woodcock's chances of hanging onto the FDA permanent head position. People may want to object, but how can they practically speaking if the Pfizer booster is, at worst, unnecessary - the US spends billions (some would say trillions) on unnecessary things ever day.

    So, we'll see shortly how this all plays out. I hope its all on YouTube, at the times advertised. I'm betting it'll take two boxes of popcorn.

    Not sure yet exactly what its all going to mean for MSB, but MSB has always played 'straight bat' & has the ODAC decision and its efforts to work with CBER to point toward.

    I intuit that the public scrutiny is likely to be very good for us, especially if any of VRBPAC's "discussion" recommendations are ignored or overruled by FDA.


    Last edited by Phaedrus: 16/09/21
 
watchlist Created with Sketch. Add MSB (ASX) to my watchlist
(20min delay)
Last
$1.51
Change
0.020(1.34%)
Mkt cap ! $1.724B
Open High Low Value Volume
$1.57 $1.58 $1.41 $18.15M 12.09M

Buyers (Bids)

No. Vol. Price($)
1 3418 $1.50
 

Sellers (Offers)

Price($) Vol. No.
$1.51 24361 5
View Market Depth
Last trade - 16.10pm 07/10/2024 (20 minute delay) ?
MSB (ASX) Chart
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.