The decision by Sarepta to discontinue SRP-5051 appears more far...

The decision by Sarepta to discontinue SRP-5051 appears more far reaching than at first glance. According to an article in FierceBiotech titled Sarepta axes late-phase DMD drug over safety signal, FDA talks, the safety signal that led to the decision to axe SRP-5051 has also taken down the biotech's entire PPMO franchise.

Is the news at all relevant to PYC and its own CPP delivery system? We go all the way back to a presentation in November 2018 and a slide titled A tale of two companies...

The point was made that Sarepta used a single parental CPP as their starting sequence whereas PYC's cell penetrating library opened up the opportunity to select from 1,000-10,000 parental CPP sequences. As I remember, Sarepta was aware of the PYC advantage but had already invested heavily in its own PPMO delivery system.

I am reminded of the danger in biotech land of the sunk cost fallacy. I am also reminded of the advantage that PYC possesses in using its library to select the most optimal parental sequence for the disease indication under consideration. I wonder whether other biotechs and Big Pharma will reflect on the tale of two companies.