Nova Eye Medical (EYE) Discussion, page-745

I have not done much research into them, though I can't see them posing any more of a threat than anti-VEGF drugs (which don't really pose a threat - they already are readily available). OPT's drug is just another treatment entering the very crowded wet AMD space, 2RT operates in the dry AMD space where there are really no competitors (although there was a monthly injection approved this year for advanced dry disease only, though due to the high cost, high frequency and low efficacy of that drug I also doubt this poses a significant threat).

In my view, there are no real competitors to 2RT at the moment. There are certainly zero competitors for early-intermediate dry AMD (70% of patients) and only one recently approved device for advance dry AMD patients (10% of patients) which is imo inferior in that it only has a 30% reduction in progression with MONTHLY injections (compared to 2RT which can reduce progression by 77% and only requires semi annual appointments). That definitely doesn't mean there won't be more competition in the future, but if you look at wet AMD treatments (which only target 10% of the total patient population) all drugs are used almost equally at much, generating similarly large revenues in the 10s of billions of dollars. Clearly the market is so large that competitors do not pose a substantial risk, there is plenty of money to go around! Every technique is unique though, and 2RT is likely to be the only non-injection option for patients which would be a big driver of adoption. Doctors will choose injections for one patient for a specific reason, and a laser for another.

If we do assume anti-VEGF to be a competitor though, this is essentially means patients will take the risk of permanent blindness by waiting for late-stage disease so that they can use anti-VEGF rather than 2RT, but I can't see the majority of patients doing that. The fear of losing vision is too significant to ignore and will likely drive people to use 2RT before they progress to later stage disease (which is where anti-VEGF comes in).

There's also the fact that patients would still (in my view) prefer half yearly (painless) laser procedures, rather than having a needle stuck in their eye every month. From a doctor's perspective, obviously that means they don't get to see their patient as much. But that issue is offset by the fact the 2RT will broaden the number of patients doctors can treat by a significant amount. To me, it seems like a win win for doctors ($$$$ hungry) and patients (quality of life hungry).

Back to OPT, OPT could certainly do very well in the wet AMD market, as that is a very lucrative market where no one product dominates (or will ever dominate). However, I don't see the success of that drug compromising the success of 2RT (just like the success of Eylea has not compromised the success of Lucentis or Avastin). The biggest risks for 2RT is actually getting it to market (imo). We need a partner and the pivotal clinical trial, but once it is approved (assuming it is), a laser that can deliver a 77% reduction in progression from much earlier on would be an absolute game changer for AMD patients.

Still, like you, I am not really factoring this into my valuation. iTrack Advance is currently the main focus but who knows, a few years down the track 2RT could be the focus. Definitely exciting stuff though, I do like that unlike OPT we already have a revenue generating product to fall back on if things don't go to plan