Seeking Alpha
We cover over 5K calls/quarter
Profile| Send Message|
( followers)  

Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:IDIX)

Update on IDX184 Clinical Development Program Conference Call

August 16, 2012 08:30 am ET

Executives

Daniella Beckman - SVP & CFO

Ron Renaud - President & CEO

Doug Mayers - EVP & CMO

David Standring - EVP & CSO

Analysts

Geoff Meacham - JPMorgan

Katherine Xu - William Blair

Yaron Werber - Citi

Howard Liang - Leerink Swann

Matt Roden - UBS

Daniel Brims - Brean Murray

Liisa Bayko - JMP

David Friedman - Morgan Stanley

Ying Huang - Barclays

Jim Birchenough - BMO Capital

Mark Schoenebaum - ISI Group

Yaron Werber - Citi

Operator

Good day ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Idenix provides update on IDX184 clinical development conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will be given at that time. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, today’s call is being recorded.

I would now like to turn the conference over to Ms. Daniella Beckman. Ma'am, you may begin.

Daniella Beckman

Thank you. Good morning and welcome to Idenix Pharmaceuticals conference call to discuss the clinical development and status of our lead drug candidate, IDX184. My name is Daniella Beckman and I am the Chief Financial Officer at Idenix.

On this morning’s call is Ron Renaud, President and Chief Executive Officer; Doug Mayers, Chief Medical Officer, who has dialed in remotely and David Standring, Chief Scientific Officer.

Before we begin, I'll review our Safe Harbor statement. Today’s discussion contains statements that are forward-looking under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are subject to risks and uncertainties and involve a number of factors that could cause actual results to differ materially.

Additional information concerning these factors is contained in our filings with the SEC today, which are available on our investor section of our website.

While we may elect to update forward-looking statements in the future, we specifically disclaim any obligation to do so even if our assumptions change.

You should not rely on these forward-looking statements as representing our assumptions as of any date subsequent to today. We issued a press release this morning and on today’s call, Ron will discuss the partial clinical hold based on IDX 184, and then we will open up the call up for Q&A. I'll now turn the call over to Ron.

Ron Renaud

Thanks Daniella. We were verbally notified by the FDA late yesterday afternoon that our clinical candidate IDX184 has been placed on partial clinical hold. We believe this is a result of the recent occurrence of a serious cardiac-related adverse event with Bristol-Myers BMS094 which is that company’s nucleotide pro-drug for the treatment of HCV.

The FDA has expressed an interest in further reviewing the safety of IDX184 and therefore it has placed IDX184 on partial clinical hold.

In previous clinical trials as well as the ongoing Phase IIb clinical trial of IDX184 dosed in combination with pegylated interferon and ribavirin, there has been no evidence to date of cardiotoxicity in patients dosed with IDX184 and pegylated interferon and ribavirin, beyond that seeing with pegylated interferon and ribavirin alone.

I should also add that there are no -- there are currently no patients receiving IDX184 worldwide. We believe and we assert that there are significant differences between IDX184 and BMS094, including an entirely different pro-drug approach.

In our view there at least three components of BMS094 and its metabolites that are not present in IDX184 and which could have contributed to the reported toxicity of BMS094.

In addition BMS094 distribution appears to be far less liver targeted than IDX184. Finally in pre-clinical testing performed by Idenix, BMS094 exhibited significant cytotoxicity across a wide variety of cell types in sharp contrast to IDX184. The FDA has requested that Idenix perform additional cardiac testing of patients in the ongoing study.

This is a priority to us, as Idenix has always committed to ensuring the safety of our patients, Specifically we are initiating echocardiograms on nine patients with reported dyspnea in the ongoing Phase IIb study. These included one case of grade 3 dyspnea and 8 cases of cases of grade 1 dyspnea.

Of note dyspnea is a well known side effect of pegylated interferon and ribavirin. We expect to submit the data to the FDA in the coming weeks. Idenix also intends to engage in an ongoing dialog with the FDA and to seek the FDA's feedback on the necessary steps to remove the partial clinical hold.

At this point our timelines for advancing IDX184 are expected to be impacted by the partial clinical hold. Until we gain additional clarity from the FDA, we cannot predict potential delays in our clinical timelines with more certainty at this time.

Patient safety is our main concern and we work quickly and diligently to address the FDA's concerns, but remain confident in the safety profile of IDX184. Idenix remains strongly committed to advancing (inaudible) or oral combination of direct acting antivirals to change the treatment paradigm of patients infected with HCV.

With that I will now turn the call back to the operator to open the question-and-answer session.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions) Our first question is from Geoff Meacham with JPMorgan.

Geoff Meacham - JPMorgan

Just got a couple here. Is it your sense from talking to FDA as the hold related to the fact that you have a somewhat similar structure, somewhat similar active metabolite or is it more to do with fact that you don’t have as many patients as say some other nucs in the space?

Ron Renaud

I would let David take that question and Doug can jump in as well. What I would tell you Jeff is I think what the FDA is trying to understand here is based on what they’ve seen with the Bristol compound trying to ensure the safety of patients across, patients taking other compounds.

You know, they did not that they would be looking at nucleoside polymerase inhibitors. So we can’t say with any kind of certainty exactly what it is they’re looking for and what they might be looking for, but we know what they asked us for. Doug? David?

David Standring

Yeah, I think I mean we do at the end of the day have potentially the same active metabolites as the BMS compound. So I think that is something that clearly is something that we own at this point but I mean, that’s all we know at this point.

We don’t know anything beyond that. They will probably look at other compounds, but we have no idea what they will say or do.

Geoff Meacham - JPMorgan

And then the follow up is on the safety side. Is it dyspnea that is the only cardiac talks that you've seen on the peg-riba backbone. I want to get a sense for what the background is.

And then the other follow up to that is, just what's your sense, after this cardiac testing, do you have to do additional analyses of the data that you presented so far. I am just trying to get a better sense for the timelines to get your information back to FDA?

Ron Renaud

Sure. so Jeff we’re going to work to get the information back to the FDA as quickly as we can. I think on the cases of dyspnea, as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, this is a very well known side effect of pegylated interferon and ribavirin and I think outside of this situation where the competitors' compound probably would have never risen to any kind of elevated levels. So we're going to take a look at those patients to start because that’s one place that we have been asked to look. Doug any additional color on that.

Doug Mayers

Yeah I mean basically the FDA has picked the number of terms that would be potentially associated with a heart failure, fatigue which occurs in over half of the patients in any peg-riba study of dyspnea where we are right in the labeled frequency of dyspnea, that is seen with peg and riba palpitations, chest pain.

So if there is any symptoms suggest of a cardiac etiology, they want to look at those patients more carefully. As Ron has stated we are well within the peg-riba label but and we are going to give them rolling data so that will give them data as it comes in.

Part of the concern is the difficulty of answering your question is they know what they are looking for from what happened to BMS. At this point, we don’t.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from Katherine Xu with William Blair. You may begin.

Katherine Xu - William Blair

So I am just wondering, so basically anything else. If you say you don’t know anything about the cardio talks or do you know a little bit about the cardio talks outside the BMS drug at this moment at all.

Ron Renaud

Yeah Katherine. I would say probably at this point there is more that we don’t know than we do know. Given that it’s a competitor’s compound. We are not going to get too much information from the FDA except what they expect from us. Clearly they are going to abide by rules of confidentiality.

We know what we have been asked to look for and that’s what we told you this morning. So that’s what we are going to set out to do and as we learn more and figure this out, we will certainly pass that along to you all.

Katherine Xu - William Blair

Just want to double check, so there are 60 patients or so, so far that have been through 184 for 12 weeks and then that's the sort of patient population that you are looking at the data set that you have?

Doug Mayers

We have 67 patients and they have asked us to track them all down.

Katherine Xu - William Blair

And how about 368, I mean how similar is to 184, you know just on the, so as the FDA is tracking down, you think that the similarities between 184 and the BMS drug and then can you sort of extrapolate to the similarities between 368 and 184 and then sort of draw some kind of initial thoughts on whether 368 would be or would not be suspected?

Ron Renaud

Well Katherine, as we said we've never disclosed the structure of 368. This issue is specific to IDX184. You know they did mention they would be looking as I said you know at other NS5B polymerase inhibitors. So we can't say with any certainty what they might look at or what else they might not look at or what they might look at, but for what we have in front of us right know this is focused on IDX184.

Katherine Xu - William Blair

And then from a timing perspective. So this is the initial set of data you are going to present, the 9 patients and then after that you are pretty much at this point don’t know what they are going to ask next?

Doug Mayers

At this point they have asked us to immediately try and get the echoes on patients who have cardiac symptoms. We will collect those and at that point we'll see what they would like next.

Katherine Xu - William Blair

These patients have been off the drug for quite a while by now, right?

Doug Mayers

Yeah, I mean some patients for the last now, many months, although all of them, except for the patients we described to at the 12 plus 12 they’re all on pegylated and interferon and ribavirin but you know, they’ve been off at least a month now and may be many months.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from Yaron Werber with Citi. You may begin.

Yaron Werber - Citi

So a few questions. Can you give us a little bit of any sense, Ron or Doug how long is it going to take to do and is this just essentially doing the echo on these patients and following what the six or seven patients to make sure they’re essentially asymptomatic and that said, or usually going to be some kind of ---

Ron Renaud

Ron, I wish I could give you some better granularity on that. I mean we’re not even 24 hours in to this. So we just learned this late yesterday afternoon. So we’re going to work as quickly and diligently as we can to get what the FDA has asked for and to have a dialog with them to figure out what we need to move forward but you can be assured that we want this to move as quickly as possible. We believe that this will be temporary. Unfortunately we can't give any kind of concrete answer on the direct impact on our timeline except that we hope that it will be short as we can make it.

Yaron Werber - Citi

Anytime, 184 with 50 milligrams, 189 with 200. Obviously they’re metabolized similarly in the blood and circulation. Give any sense of the differences in exposure in patients when you look at their data versus theirs and the active metabolite and how much lower or?

Ron Renaud

I will pass it over to Doug and David but just to clarify Yaron, we use a 100 milligrams of 184 in this (inaudible). Doug, David do you want to address the exposure.

Doug Mayers

I will start up, the bottom line is they have significantly higher exposures of both their pro-drug 189 and their metabolite to methyl guanosine as compared to 184, it’s multiple fold over for the pro-drug because they have a different targeting technology this is not as highly liver targeted and it’s about fourfold for the two methyl guanosine in the peripheral blood. At this point David, can you give you a lot more details about this but we have very low exposures and very low uptake of pro-drug in this systemic circulation it's almost all taken up into deliver IDX 189 had much more significant system exposures and much higher up take systemically. So, they are different, the only commonality is in the liver they go to 2 methyl guanosine triphosphate.

David Standring

Yeah and I think to sort of to come to your point again, we don’t know exactly what the triphosphate levels are in the liver I mean that’s probably the key metabolite that they share in common. In preclinical studies in animals, we think that they give similar levels for the same dose basically triphosphate. In terms of the circulating metabolites, I think the 2 methyl guanosine is definitely higher for the BMS or 94 and I will point out that pro-drug technology is quite different, so the liver targeting piece I think its 184 we believe is much more liver targeted than the BMS or 94 is and also the circulating metabolites from the pro-drug are quite different and there are at least three different metabolites coming from the pro-drug piece on 189 or BMS or 94 that you know could have potential issues we don’t know whether they do or don’t have such issues but just bearing in mind that these are not same molecules by any means.

Yaron Werber - Citi

You mention in the final question, do you hear there is at least a form of suspicion right, that at least the metabolites look the same? If you think they are just going to blanket it now every other drug even though it's got totally different structures and ask everybody to do echo and cardio tox screening or is do you think this is obviously more related to the structure?

Ron Renaud

Yes Yaron on I don’t think we know, I don’t think we want to speak on behalf of the FDA beyond what we said is they didn’t mention that. They would be looking at you know to start NS 5B polymerase inhibitors and that’s all we know and that is you know they are not obligated to share any different, any additional information with us.

Operator

Thank you our next questions is from Howard Liang with Leerink Swann you may begin

Howard Liang - Leerink Swann

Thanks very much so my understanding of the Bristol compound is that the reason the program was put on suspension because there is similarity between the preclinical finding and the clinical finding and can you say that whether you have seen anything similar in your preclinical toxicity towards clinically were the INX 189?

Ron Renaud

Yeah Howard as we said many, many times in the past in our preclinical tox program the objective was to find tox, it is important that you actually can fine dose limiting toxicities, in doing so we submitted all that information to the FDA with our original IND and move forward clearly we had margins that were adequate to move forward into clinical testing, we also went through a last clinical hold process where we submitted an additional amount, significant amount of safety information around IDX 184 and came out of that situation and we're able to move forward. As I mentioned in my prepared remarks, we've taken looks at this. We have the DSMB, an independent data safety monitoring board look, their job is to look for safety concerns. Not anything specific but just look for safety concerns and you know, to-date we have not seen anything that has risen above the level of pegylated interferon and ribavirin. So again we will comply with what the FDA has asked here in and try to move forward very quickly.

Howard Liang - Leerink Swann

And if I can just follow-up, in this case what is the partial hold mean, can you run anything?

Ron Renaud

Yeah, I still suspect that we still had patients that are around the peg/riba part of the study and they will be a lot continue to move forward on that part.

Howard Liang - Leerink Swann

But you can’t start any file, any study, start a new patient on 184?

Ron Renaud

But we don’t, that plan understand but we don’t currently have the trial schedule to start eminently as it was. Our next study with [IDX 184] is expected to be the 184 and 719 study that we want to initiate before the end of this year.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from Matt Roden with UBS. You may begin.

Matt Roden - UBS

So, firstly, Ron, you just mentioned that DSMB review, wondering if you could go into that in a little bit more detail as possible to see if there is any interest flagged by the committee with respect to dyspnea or any of the other potential signs or symptoms of cardio tox and then I have a follow-up.

Ron Renaud

Yeah, I will let Doug to deal that one.

Douglas Mayers

Yeah I mean the DSMB is composed of hepatologists and liver experts and basically they have looked predominantly at do have any liver signal because of the previous partial hold. They also looked the overall safety and overall efficacy and they compare the groups and so what I can tell you is they have seen all of the adverse events they have seen all the EKGs, they have seen all the labs and the shift tables and what they have concluded is there no evidence of a safety signal and no efficacy concerns as of about a month ago. So that they had all the data for the study up to a month ago and had no safety concerns across the study.

Matt Roden - UBS

And then when you put this into the context of the larger body of data that you have for 184. And then you have a huge preclinical data set in part because of the previous clinical hold and then you also have in my understanding, you have micrographs and things like that for all, the looking at all the tox signals not only in animals but also in the Phase II A study where you had EKG. So when we look across hundreds of data, is there any sort of possibility that the drug is directly related apart from the structural similarity to [INX 189].

Douglas Mayers

The bottom line is and what complicates this for all of us is peg/riba has no changes to the EKG, it causes less left ventricular dysfunction we know that from previous studies. So the peg/riba by itself will cause a number of changes in little aged patients who take it, all I can tell you is from everything we have seen it from extensive literature reviews, everything we are seeing is within the expected frequency with peg and riba. So to complicate things is peg and riba causes for example prolongation, intraventricular conduction delay on EKGs and so you do see some of that but everything we have seen is consistent with what you do with peg and riba, it shows no evidence of added changes from what you need for.

Matt Roden - UBS

And then lastly I realize this question may be a little bit premature but have you guys given any thought to continuing to plans in the events that [184] gets hold up for longer than you think or it is worse than you think if you thought about you know what the trends might be going forward with 719 and 368?

Ron Renaud

Hi Matt this is Ron of course I mean you have to plan for all the eventualities and again I would just say we are you know we have IND filed on 368, 719 continues to you know we still have that as a lead horse in our pipeline. So we will continue to try to move forward as quickly and as aggressively as we can with those compounds and try to put them in the best chance to succeed. We do believe this will be temporary for IDX 184 as I mentioned we are confident in the safety profile at 184 from what we have seen to-date believe we well will be able to get this back into the clinic but you know we got to get past this with the FDA first.

Operator

Thank you our next question is from Daniel Brims with Brean Murray. You may begin

Daniel Brims - Brean Murray

Thanks for taking my question. You mentioned there were three points of difference between the two drugs one being the liver targeting, one is the vitro toxicity what was the third point that again you are saying is different between the two drugs that lead you to believe that?...

David Standring

The prodrug technology is itself is completely different between the two. So although the final active metabolite is the same, the method of delivery, the pro-drug vehicle if you will is quite different between the two. So the chemical entity is to build the prodrug are actually different and therefore the metabolites that come from the prodrug other than the triphosphate itself are basically different metabolites.

And there is another difference too, the BMS compound is actually modified on the guanosine by a methoxy group and that can give potentially release methanol which can go to formaldehyde. But you know, we have no idea whether these or anything to do with the picture there of what is happened. So 184, 189, BMS-094 and again we know very little about the actual toxicity seen in the clinics. So it is very difficult for us to comment on that.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from Liisa Bayko with JMP. You may begin.

Liisa Bayko - JMP

Most of my questions have been answered, but can you just remind us on the timing of the IND for 368; I know you just submitted that; when will you have it clear to move ahead?

Ron Renaud

Yes, Liisa we said that we’ve recently filed the IND and that we expect it to be able to start our clinical studies before the end of the quarter.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from David Friedman with Morgan Stanley. You may begin.

David Friedman - Morgan Stanley

Just two quick ones; the first is of the echoes that you guys were asked to do, how many are on drug patients versus were you asked to do any on placebo patients? And then can you just identify what the breakdown products are of the 189 prodrug?

Ron Renaud

Sure, absolutely, the first part and then David take the second part.

Doug Mayers

Okay, so the bottomline is none of our patients are currently on drug; they are all on Peg/Riba extension. All the patients were on our drug of Peg/Riba because we have not placebo, so that basically we are going to try and attract of all 67 patients starting with the he ones who had dyspnea first and we will do echoes of them, most of them, while they are still on Peg and Riba.

David Standring

In terms of the breakdown products of the BMS-094 drug, I mean that clearly is their drug and I think that’s a question for them to answer to a certain degree, but it’s a (inaudible) type of prodrug; we know it contains a naphthol group and one naphthol can be released from that. The other part of the prodrug contains a neopentyl group which can actually go to a particular asset and at least in a in vitro type of toxicity experiment sometimes confers extra site of toxicity and also from the G, the guanosine base, and O-methyl group release methanol and that’s really we don’t know specifically whether one of those components is anything to do with what has been seen.

David Friedman - Morgan Stanley

And how different is that prodrug from the 7977 prodrug then?

David Standring

I think it’s very differ in terms of chemical structure, the metabolites; I will say that we have substantially derisked our metabolites; we have looked at them very carefully; actually presented some of this in a recent talk at The International Round Table of Nucleosides, Nucleotides and Nuclei Acids, Montreal last week. That presentation is available on our website. And we have not seen any of those kind of problems; basically we believe that the prodrugs are very different both in terms of the structure and also in terms of many of the functional components there, many of the functional characteristics. We remain confident in the properties and the safety of our own compound but we can't really comment that much on the BMS-094.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from Ying Huang with Barclays. You may begin

Ying Huang - Barclays

Number one, may be I missed this, but did the FDA specifically mentioned that your hold is based on only the Bristol-094 nuc or broadly speaking simply the nucleotide polymerase inhibitors in clinic, because how come Roche or Vertex did not get a partial hold on this one? And then can you remind us how many patients have been exposed to IDX184 to date and finally have you ever seen any preclinical cardio tox at all on any of those?

Ron Renaud

So Ying let me be clear, with regard to you know the partial hold, you know we guess that had this issue with Bristol not occurred, we probably wouldn’t be doing this call this morning, I think that’s the first thing. I think the second thing is you know in terms of the actual number of the patients that have been exposed to 184 from the healthy volunteers three day proof of concept Doug I think it’s somewhere in order of little over 100 patients?

Doug Mayers

Yeah, it’s over 100 patients but for doses beyond two weeks is 67.

Ron Renaud

And then with regard to your question about preclinical toxicity again, we have not disclosed what our preclinical toxicity is except to say that we did look for a number of toxicity targets, organ targets, this is information that we have shared you know many times with the FDA, both as I mentioned in the IND and in the last whole process and felt that we had margins that were adequate to move forward into the clinic and that’s all we’re going to say on that.

Ying Huang - Barclays

And then if I may have just follow-up; so David, you presented at the IRT slide deck including data for the Bristol nucs; the CC 50 in the human cardio (inaudible) lines, do you guys know whether that’s caused by the compound itself, the parent compound or any sort of metabolites or 2-methly G?

David Standring

No, I think at this point we know that it’s specific to that compound, but we don't know the mechanism behind that. We have not tried to investigate that.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from Jim Birchenough with BMO Capital. You may begin.

Jim Birchenough - BMO Capital

Just a couple of clarifying questions, on the pre-clinical data, are you saying that you identified a no adverse event level for cardio talks or that you just didn’t see it at all? And then I just want to understand what you need to do with the echoes here, you are doing nine echoes, or echoes in nine patients. Do you think you will have to do serial echoes, A; and then the second part is, would you expect given that 50% of the patients have fatigue, you will ultimately have to do echoes in any patients with fatigue out of the 67? Thanks.

Ron Renaud

Yeah, I’ll let Doug take the second part. What I would tell you Jim, again we’re not going to specify what type of pre-clinical talks we did see. We did have an OAEL and again that's all we’ll say on that, but that’s what we’re supposed to do. We’re supposed to look for toxicity so that in the events in the clinic, if you do see something, you can refer back to what you’re seeing pre-clinically and in fact it’s generally more discomforting when you have a pre-clinical tox package that you don’t see across the city. So there was nothing that we saw in our pre-clinical tox package that gave us any pause to move forward into clinical testing.

Doug Mayers

Yeah, with regard to echoes, we are going to have to echo everybody in the study. We are going to prioritize those who have dyspnea first then we are going to go after patients who have fatigue and also try to get everyone in to get an echo. At this point, I don’t think we can give you a clear guidance on what process will be beyond that; I suspect that BMS is quickly doing the same thing we are doing and the FDA is going to accept the echoes from us both on a real-time basis and they are going to compare what they see. So we are just going to have to let the FDA see the echoes that come out of the program of BMS and our echoes and we will go from there.

Jim Birchenough - BMO Capital

And just a follow-up on the echoes; is this done by some independent adjudication group or who reads the echoes?

Doug Mayers

I think to get them in quickly, we are going to have them read locally and try and get the tapes, so that each one is probably read at least initially by the local practitioner to get the data into the agency.

Jim Birchenough - BMO Capital

Thanks guys.

Ron Renaud

Yeah I think I would add before you take the next question is again, you have to remember that the FDA knows they have the information so they know what it is that they are looking for and what they are concerned about. We don’t have that specific color on what it is exactly that they are looking for; we just know that we need to do these echoes and get them that information.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question is from Mark Schoenebaum with ISI. You may begin.

Mark Schoenebaum - ISI Group

Have you guys given out the EC 50 or the CC 50 from pre-clinical in vitro cell side of toxicity assays on cardiac tissue?

David Standring

I believe we have at some point in fact in the early days.

Doug Mayers

We haven’t done the cardio myositis at this point; we are doing that; I think we did some early work in perhaps a different cell line there, a different cell line that we have. But in general, 184 has very little cytotoxicity, very low cytotoxicity in pretty much every cell line that we have tested and especially, cell lines are way from the liver lineate. So this compound appears to be very strongly activated in the liver cells and much less activated in other cells and the BMS-094 in contrast I think appears to be activated and pretty much and therefore cytotoxic in pretty much all cell lines that we looked at; that’s all we know.

Mark Schoenebaum - ISI Group

So the…….

Doug Mayers

ECP, it is about the order 200 nano-molar, 100 to 200 nano-molar, depending on which effect represent on cell line stream.

Mark Schoenebaum - ISI Group

That’s in cardiac tissue, 100 to 200?

Doug Mayers

That’s the EC 50 and against HCV in the liver cell line.

Mark Schoenebaum - ISI Group

When you actually look at the cellular cytotoxicity assays in vitro cells, the assays is EC 50; were they higher than it could be a mass compound to your knowledge and then I’ll drop off? Thank you.

Doug Mayers

Yeah, much higher; I mean generally greater than 50 or greater than a 100 micro-molar, greater than 200 micro-molar in many cases. So yeah, they generally very high, the BMS compound optimist is around as low as 210 nano-molar in some assays we looked at in our hands, but typically in the low micro-molar range or below.

Operator

(Operator Instructions) We have a follow-up question from Yaron Werber with Citi. You may begin.

Yaron Werber - Citi

No, think that we got the question already, thank you.

Operator

Thank you. I am showing no further questions at this time. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Daniella Beckman for closing remarks.

Daniella Beckman

Thank you for your time today and your interest in Idenix. Please feel free to call if you have any additional questions. Thank you.

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen this concludes today’s conference. Thank you for your participation and have a wonderful day.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!

Source: Idenix Pharmaceuticals' CEO Provides Update on IDX184 Clinical Development Program Conference (Transcript)
This Transcript
All Transcripts