Vervolg op Vragen tijdens Galapagagos Webcast 17 december
Mark Pospisilik - Kempen & Co. - Analyst
Thanks for taking my questions, and congratulations from me as well. Maybe just one on the -- from all the partners that you were in discussions
with, if you could sort of -- what the consensus view on positioning of JAKs as a class in RA?
I mean, are people primarily excited about, and is the focus going forward on putting these definitively in first line? Or, is there sort of still a first
focus in sort of coming after TNFs?
And then, sort of a follow-on -- that question, more specific for filgotinib, any thoughts from potential partners on, say, unique features of filgotinib
-- the hemoglobin benefit, and lipids -- how that might lead to positioning and strategy and development?
Onno van de Stolpe - Galapagos NV - CEO
Yes. To start with your first question, we are strong believers that ultimately the JAKs should be positioned as first-line therapies, and therapy that's
shared by the partners, and the main reason being the fast onset of action. Where you have to wait a couple of months with the TNFs to see efficacy
in most patients, with the JAKS you see a very good efficacy in 1 to 2 weeks. So, for the doctors to see if the drug works in a specific patient within
2 weeks is a big advantage.
Of course, on top of that, the oral, taking a pill a day versus injection or IV, is also a big advantage. So, I think longer-term, first line is the way to go.
However, we don't (Fout Reuter i.m.o) need to have a lot of safety data to be able to convince doctors to change their view of not starting treatment with the TNFs.
Regarding the profile, with hemoglobin and the lipid profile, favoritism of filgotinib over the rest -- clearly, that is an important factor. It's the big
differentiator versus baricitinib. And we believe that patients in both diseases, actually -- both in RA as well as in IBD -- are often anemic and would
benefit from a treatment that actually raises the hemoglobin and helps prevent anemia.
The lipid profile is now consistently shown to improve by filgotinib, which is also a big benefit. We have seen it in DARWIN 1. We saw it to a lesser
extent in the monotherapy DARWIN 2. But in the FITZROY Crohn's study we again saw a substantial improvement of the lipid profile, so we believe
we got a very strong differentiating aspect in that regard as well.
Regarding efficacy, we'll have to show in the Phase III how it stands out compared to baricitinib. With regard to Crohn's, there's of course much
less of a competition at this moment. There are very few effective treatments in Crohn's, so there, the field is still wide open.