Inari (NARI), a new position for me

Inari (NARI), a new position for me.

In my end of the year write-up three weeks ago, I mentioned that I had taken a little position that I wasn’t ready to discuss yet. I’ve now fully decided to make it a (small) position, and it is now just under a 4% position, and I expect I will not add to it over 4% of my portfolio (although it may grow over that level on its own). I would also strongly advise that you don’t establish large positions in this company if you decide to invest in it, as this is not an established company, and it has a trading volume much less than the rest of our companies. If there is bad news, getting out of your position in a hurry might be problematic. And whatever you do, don’t just buy Inari because I did! Make your own decision. It may not fit into your investing style and criteria at all.

Inari is a medical device company which markets several products for the removal of venous clots and pulmonary emboli. Its IPO was in May 2020. Ordinarily I have little to do with small med-tech companies but this one has advantages. What kind of advantages.

1 – Its devices already have FDA approval. They are already producing rapidly expanding revenue.

2 – They have huge advantages over the prior treatment which required long term use of expensive dangerous medications (thrombolytic anticoagulants), more invasive surgery, stays in ICU, morbidity and mortality from the procedures, etc. The Nari procedures can be done in the cath lab, from what I understand, with the patient awake, with zero ICU days, zero mortality, no thrombolytic drugs, etc.

3 – The products are one-time use. There is no capex expense for the hospital or the physician, and the revenue will be recurring, and have a considerably greater than 100% Net Retention Rate as physicians who tentatively tried it this year will use it on more and more patients next year.

4 – The products are extremely well accepted by doctors and hospitals. Revenue growth has been:


**2018 		  7 million**
**2019		 51 million**
**2020 (est)      140 million**

**2019	 7      10	14	20  =	  51**
**2020	27	25	39	49  =  	 140** 

5 – They have a 92% gross margin and are already profitable for the past five quarters

Take a look at those results, and take into account that the April, May, June quarter of 2020 was hit by the initial Covid panic, and revenue actually declined slightly from $27 million in the March quarter to $25 million in the June quarter. They rebounded in the September quarter to $39 million, but there were some worries that the December quarter would also be hard hit by the Covid comeback but, to my relief, they just pre-announced $48 to $49 million, up from $20 million the year before, perhaps slowed by just $5 million by Covid.

Here are the Sept quarter results, followed by more excerpts from my notes:

• Record procedure volume, with over 3,700 patients treated, up 185% yoy and up 48% sequentially.

• Revenue of up 172% yoy and up 52% sequentially.

• Finished with $168 million in cash.

In the quarter we made significant progress in our mission to transform the lives of patients with venous disease. We introduced meaningful new technology and aggressively expanded our commercial footprint. Most importantly, we treated a record number of patients. The increase was driven by continued US expansion and increased product adoption. We are are grateful that our hospital customers and physicians have also adapted and established a constructive operating environment for patient treatments. We have found ways to execute effectively through the pandemic in all areas of our business. We are, however, encouraging a bit of caution as we look forward. Cath lab volumes have not returned to normal, while Covid cases and hospitalizations already at all-time highs continue to rise as we approach winter. We have again seen impacts on our hospital customers, on patients seeking and gaining access to care, on our commercial efforts at various hotspots throughout the country, and on our day to day operations, while we remain confident in our growth drivers and our medium and long term prospects for aggressive and sustainable growth, we continue to recognize the uncertainty of the immediate term.

Gross margin was 91.7%, up from 89.4% last year.

Operating expenses were 73% of revenue, improved from 83% last year. [Good] Remember that we did have increased expenses related to being a public company.

Operating income was $7.2 million compared to $0.9 million last year

Net income was $6.5 million, up from $0.4 million last year.

EPS was 12 cents up from 1 cent.

Cash was $168 million, which reflected a $30 million total payoff of our long-term debt during the quarter.

Outlook and COVID-19
Due to uncertainty surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, we will not provide financial guidance for the remainder of 2020 at this time.

About Inari - Inari is focused on treating venous thromboembolism and improving the quality of life of patients suffering from this disease by safely and effectively removing blood clots. Inari has developed two minimally invasive, novel catheter-based mechanical thrombectomy devices that are designed to remove large clots from large vessels and eliminate the need for thrombolytic drugs.

The ClotTriever system is 510(k)-cleared by the FDA for deep vein thrombosis.

The FlowTriever system is 510(k)-cleared by the FDA for pulmonary embolism.

Note that both products are disposable and there is no need for capital expense by doctor or hospital. Intuitive, easy to use, single-use devices that do not require capital equipment or the use of thrombolytic drugs and that enable a short learning curve. Products allow for short, single sessions and are designed to eliminate:

need for expensive thrombolytics, which require
costly ICU stays, and which carry
risks of major bleeding.

Blended revenue per procedure is $9,100

Conference Call
The results further confirm the excellent safety record of FlowTriever treatment of pulmonary embolism. There were no deaths at the 48 hour follow up. Patients with similar risk profile historically carry a significant mortality risk. In addition, there were no cardiac injuries, no pulmonary injuries, no procedure-related deteriorations. And importantly, there were no instances of intracranial hemorrhage, a devastating complication associated with both systemic and catheter directed thrombolytic-based treatments.

Efficacy data were equally compelling. Statistically and clinically significant decreases in heart rate and pulmonary artery pressure were shown, along with statistically and clinically significant increase in cardiac index, all while the patient was still on the table. These data are consistent with anecdotal observations that patients feel better even before they leave the cath lab.

Finally, post-procedure ICU stay was zero days. This is of course always important for clinical and economic reasons, but even more so in the midst of a pandemic, while hospitals are doing their very best to preserve ICU beds for COVID and other very sick patients.

We entered Q4 with approximately 120 territories, up from 90 sequentially, due to increased hiring…

Our goal is to also access those patients currently treated with conservative medical management, which represents perhaps 90% of Pulmonary Embolism patients and about 67% of our Deep Venous Thrombosis patients. We believe we’re beginning to have some success on this front. [Saul: Big potential expansion of TAM]

Finally, during the quarter, 14 articles in peer-reviewed journals featured the Inari technology. The highlight was a retrospective multicenter analysis, in which 34 high risk PE patients were treated in four centers. Only one mortality was reported at the mean 205 day follow-up. For reference, patients of similar risks carry a mortality rate up to 40%.

Another growth driver is to continue to expand our product portfolio. For example, earlier this year we introduced a 24 French aspiration and delivery catheter for pulmonary embolism. This resulted in significant migration from our smaller 20 platform. This is important as larger bore catheters remove more clot and the clot matters. We believe this is critical to both acute and longer term outcomes.

More recently, we introduced the T24 Flex, which is 40% more flexible than the original Triever24, making it even more deliverable. The early response from our customers to the T24 Flex has been highly favorable and we expect it will drive further migration to the larger platform.

We anticipate introducing several additional product enhancements over the coming months, including our FlowSaver device. This device is a simple disposable filtration system that will enable physicians to reintroduce extracted blood back into the patient. This will enable the physician to be more aggressive, making more aspiration passes without concern for blood loss. The goal, again, is to remove as much clot as possible.

As a reminder, our current primary aim is not to produce net income. Rather, we are aiming to deliver sustainable revenue growth and our positive net income is a positive byproduct of the company’s performance, and it allows us to invest more aggressively in the growth drivers rather than using our capital to cover operating losses.

Analyst comment: these extraordinary results that you’ve put up here clearly suggest that this market for treating venous clots with mechanical thrombectomy technologies is not only inflected, but inflected in the middle of a pandemic, which is just pretty amazing.

There is a ton of runway. And again, you cannot underestimate the self-evident nature of the effect of the clot. There’s just never a time the clot comes out and someone says, well, I’m just not sure that taking it out really helped. That just doesn’t happen!

Dec 2020 – Thanks to WakeBoarder who brought it to the board and to my attention.
Free cash flow turned positive in Sep 2020 quarter.

Business model is asset light without much capex.

Total addressable market is huge with room for global expansion.

NARI is a medical device company offering single use disposable catheter systems to treat deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Simplified, these devices are used to remove blood clots from the body of the patients. No machine or durable equipment sales. R&D for additional venous treatments is work in progress.

Products are on the market and they have several patents.

Saul: Global expansion could pose a problem. A tiny company like this might have to work entirely with distributors in foreign markets. And foreign countries have very small medical payments and insurance reimbursements compared to the US. They would probably have to sell devices to distributors at most at 20% to 30% of the price that they sell at retail in the US to allow for the lower final price points, and also to allow the distributors to make at a 50% to 100% profit (which they would probably insist on). This would still bring in additional gross profit dollars to Inari, but at a lower rate per procedure.

Another problem I see is that there is no moat except that it works, and if another company came out with either a better product, or with an equal product at a significant cheaper price, the doctors could possibly change device companies tomorrow and not miss a beat. However doctors are pretty conservative, and if they have a procedure that they have learned to use, and that they know works well, and works safely, they are probably very unlikely to change unless there is a CLEAR advantage.

WakeBoarder - Q3 2019, a year ago was the first quarter they were profitable. With the exception of Q2 '20, every quarter has been profitable since then. They are also cash flow positive as of Q3 '20.

The company claims 3,700 patients treated in Q3 2020 in the USA with the products (annualized 14,800). They claim their TAM is around 442000 cases per year in the USA (source: current investor presentation). Time will tell if Inari can reach a good chunk here.

About reimbursement and pricing: although the products look expensive at first sight, these catheter systems LOWER the total costs of treatment in the health system as they reduce ICU bed usage and total time of treatment. But of course you never know what regulators and clinics think at the end of the day.

International expansion: if the products basically sell themselves it will be easy to find international distributors at good rates (SG&M for this should be similar to internal costs for sales in the USA). Distributors are always looking for easy sells and door opener products but they avoid tough sales at all costs. According to their Q3 2020 call they plan to have their own sales team on the ground in Europe as the products received a CE mark, but rollout is delayed because of the current virus situation.

The company has a kind of subscription business model once a doctor likes the product. But it has to be seen if there is a good moat around the company or whether new competitors can eat their lunch within a second. At the end of the day the competitive situation is probably the key. Other companies will enter this market as it seems to be too attractive. And, of course, there should be no material adverse events.

Denny - While you may lose Gross Margin going through a channel for foreign sales, you should also reduce SG&M expenses so the net margin may not be too different, depending on what the Channel brings to you. For example, you can have one account manager meaning many Partners/Distributors but those Partners may have multiple sales people and are working at growing the pipeline as well as have feet on the ground to provide training and services. So while you lose at the Gross Margin level you gain at the net margin level

14,800 out of 442,000 translates into a current 3.35% market penetration. Doctors out there, what sort of market penetration do you think a good product can have and how long to get there?

50% in 10 years is a CAGR of 31%

The above, of course, ignores new products and procedures which would boost CAGR much higher.

Jan 2021 - Press Release – new FDA clearance
• Inari receives 510(k) clearance from the FDA for its FlowTriever system for the treatment of Clot in Transit in the right atrium.
• FlowTriever is the first thrombectomy system not requiring a cardiopulmonary bypass circuit to be FDA cleared for blood clots in the right atrium.
• 25,000 patients are diagnosed with this condition in the United States annually, and the condition is associated with a mortality rate of over 80% if left untreated.
• “FlowTriever offers an exciting new treatment option to safely remove clot from the right atrium in a short, single session procedure without general anesthesia while avoiding the bleeding risks of thrombolytics,” interventional cardiologist Gautam Kumar said.

Jan 2021 - Pre-announcement of results
Preliminary Fourth Quarter Revenue and Business Highlights:

• Preliminary unaudited revenue is expected to be in the range of $47.9 million to $48.9 million in the fourth quarter, up 141% to 146% yoy, and up 24% to 26% sequentially.

• The company completed approximately 4,600 procedures in the quarter, up 156% yoy, and up 24% sequentially.

“We are pleased with our procedural growth in the fourth quarter and the opportunity to save and transform the lives of VTE patients, especially in the face of the challenges presented by the pandemic. Our team is executing our strategic plan and we look forward to sharing our progress on our quarterly earnings call.”

I hope that this was of help,

Saul

152 Likes

Nice buy, Saul! I need to start taking my own advice and buy stocks when I review them. LOL. I posted about it back in July when it was $48/share and didn’t take any action. https://discussion.fool.com/inari-medical-34553267.aspx?sort=pos…
Oh well! Here’s hoping it continues to improve.

5 Likes

As twelge mentions in his post there was an Industry Focus podcast about Inari in Jun 2020 shortly after it became public. I will not repeat his comments but will add they mention there are 1 million vein thrombotic events in the US per year of which the company feels their devices could be used in 412K of them. Insiders own about 2/3s of the company with the CEO, Bill Hoffman owning 3%. Bill is not the founder but has sold a medical device company to Medtronics in the past. In the past six months they have gone from $2B to $4B in market cap. Cannot say whether they are fattening the hog before sale or if they intend to retain. One thing from twelge’s thread from his post were comments by IRdoc. He gave insight that it Inari’s product was not the only one that could be used on veins though may be the only one designed exclusively for veins. He wanted to try it but his hospital would not buy it. Apparently the company has improved their pitch. Hopefully he can give an update as to whether his hospital is now a buyer and his experience if he has now used it.

Dave

10 Likes

Hi Saul,

Thank you for introducing NARI. NARI sounds like an interesting company. Reading about what the company does I also questioned if this company has a moat. However, I checked the patent database and found that Inari Medical have 7 patent families

I would like to upload the WORD document containing results from the patent database so that everybody can see the Inari portfolio however I don’t see how I can do this. I also cannot post a link to the results because I am using a paid professional patent DB search tool which requires a login. So I will just list a very brief summary of the families here below. I hope this is useful.

After having considered the NARI patent portfolio I am of the opinion that it is highly likely that their patents/patent applications will provide them with a moat. Also it is worth noting that the patents/patent applications are relatively young - so assuming that the pending patent applications are eventually accepted for grant I suspect that their granted patents will provide them with a wide moat- at least wide enough to allow them to build a reputation in the market before the “Big Fish” can start to compete.

However one thing that concerns me is that they don’t have their patents mentioned on their website - I went to the Flow Triever and Clot Triever product page and there is no mention of patent numbers or patent application numbers for either of these products. If a product is patent protected or had a patent pending, then it is typical for a company to mention this along with the patent number or patent application number on the product website as doing so can help prevent third party infringers from pleading a defense of ignorance in certain countries (at least that is the case in Europe). So I find it unusual that they have not mentioned patent number or patent application numbers on their webpage for these products.

The 7 patent families are as follows:

  1. US2020046368 : Systems and methods for the intravascular treatment of clot material within a blood vessel of a human patient are disclosed herein. A method in accordance with embodiments of the present technology can include, for example, positioning a distal portion of a catheter proximate to the clot material within the blood vessel. The method can further include coupling a pressure source to the catheter via a tubing subsystem including a valve or other fluid control device and, while the valve is closed, activating the pressure source to charge a vacuum. The valve can then be opened to apply the vacuum to the catheter to thereby aspirate at least a portion of the clot material from the blood vessel and into the catheter.

  2. US2019231373: Systems and methods for the intravascular treatment of clot material within a blood vessel of a human patient are disclosed herein. A method in accordance with embodiments of the present technology can include, for example, engaging an interventional device of a catheter system with clot material in a blood vessel and withdrawing the interventional device and the portion of the clot material through a guide catheter. In some embodiments, the catheter system can include an attachment/valve member coupled to a proximal portion of the guide catheter, and the method can include unsealing the attachment/valve member to facilitate withdrawing the interventional device through the attachment/valve member without significant retention of clot material within the attachment/valve member. The method can further include resealing and aspirating the guide catheter before advancing another interventional device to the clot material to again engage and remove clot material from the blood vessel.

  3. US2018361116: Catheter shafts and associated devices, systems, and methods are disclosed herein, A representative catheter in accordance with an embodiment of the disclosure includes a generally tubular outer structure and an inner structure surrounded by the outer structure. The inner structure surrounds a catheter lumen. The inner structure includes over-lapping edges such that, when the catheter is bent along its longitudinal axis, the over-lapping edges move relative to one another.

  4. US2015352325 : Retraction and aspiration devices, systems, and methods are disclosed herein. One aspect of the present technology, for example, is directed toward an apparatus for use with a catheter system configured to enable intravascular delivery of an interventional device to a treatment site in a blood vessel. The apparatus can include a housing configured to be releasably coupled to a proximal portion of the catheter system and an actuation mechanism coupled to the housing. The actuation mechanism can include a lever movably coupled to the housing, a locking portion configured to engage a portion of the catheter system, and a pressure source coupled to the housing and the actuation mechanism. Movement of the lever simultaneously activates the pressure source to generate pressure, and moves the locking portion to engage and retract at least a portion of the catheter system

  5. US2019070401: Devices, systems, and methods for sealing medical devices, particularly during intravascular access, are disclosed herein. Some aspects relate to a hemostatic valve for sealing a wide range of medical devices, such as catheters, wires, embolectomy systems. The valve can include an elongate member having a first end, a second end, and a central lumen extending therebetween. A reinforcement structure extends along at least a portion of the elongate member and is coupled to the elongate member. A shell defining a first aperture and a second aperture may be included, which first and second apertures can be fluidly coupled by the elongate member. A tensioning mechanism is coupled to the shell and to the elongate member, the tensioning mechanism can be moveable between a first configuration wherein the tensioning mechanism is collapsed and the central lumen is sealed and a second configuration wherein the central lumen is open

  6. US2014155908: A method and apparatus for treating a clot in the blood vessel of a patient, and particularly the treatment of a pulmonary embolism is disclosed. The treatment includes restoring flow through the clot followed by clot removal, either partially or substantially completely. The clot treatment device is expandable into the blood vessel and may contain radial extensions that assist in restoring flow as well as in removing clot material

  7. US2017112513: Systems and methods for treating thrombosis and or emboli in a peripheral vasculature of a patient are disclosed herein. The method can include providing a thrombus extraction device including a proximal self-expanding coring portion formed of a unitary fenestrated structure and a distal expandable tubular portion formed of a braided filament mesh structure; advancing a catheter constraining the thrombus extraction device through a vascular thrombus in a vessel; deploying the thrombus extraction device from the catheter from a constrained configuration to an expanded configuration; retracting the thrombus extraction device proximally so that the coring portion cores and separates a portion of the vascular thrombus from the venous vessel wall while the mesh structure captures the vascular thrombus portion; and withdrawing the thrombus extraction device from the patient to remove the vascular thrombus portion from the vessel.

Regards
MoneySpin

55 Likes

I would like to upload the WORD document containing results from the patent database so that everybody can see the Inari portfolio however I don’t see how I can do this. I also cannot post a link to the results because I am using a paid professional patent DB search tool which requires a login.

I would caution against that if the document came from a commercial database. Apparently the document is not in public release, so sharing it here would violate TMF TOS as well as your commercial provider.

🆁🅶🅱
post tenebras lux
For not in my bow do I trust, nor can my sword save me.

2 Likes

Freepatentsonline.com, Justia and (I think) Google have online patent data bases. I was able to search with “patents” and “Inari” and find some of those you list.

3 Likes

After having considered the NARI patent portfolio I am of the opinion that it is highly likely that their patents/patent applications will provide them with a moat. Also it is worth noting that the patents/patent applications are relatively young - so assuming that the pending patent applications are eventually accepted for grant I suspect that their granted patents will provide them with a wide moat- at least wide enough to allow them to build a reputation in the market before the “Big Fish” can start to compete.

However one thing that concerns me is that they don’t have their patents mentioned on their website - I went to the Flow Triever and Clot Triever product page and there is no mention of patent numbers or patent application numbers for either of these products. If a product is patent protected or had a patent pending, then it is typical for a company to mention this along with the patent number or patent application number on the product website as doing so can help prevent third party infringers from pleading a defense of ignorance in certain countries (at least that is the case in Europe). So I find it unusual that they have not mentioned patent number or patent application numbers on their webpage for these products.

Hi MoneySpin,
Just thought I’d let you know that I forwarded your concern to Investor Relations at Inari. Don’t forget that you can do that whenever you have a concern about a company. Takes two minutes.
Best,
Saul

29 Likes

Here is a link to 11 US patent families assigned to Inari Medical from the European Patent Office (publicly available) Database:

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search?f=publications…

14 Likes

Saul and board,

I have been a long time lurker and follower and tremendously appreciate all the advise the board has given.

Like IRDoc, I too am an Interventional Radiologist and have some insight finally amongst all you financial freaks (i mean that positively).

I will provide input from a technical perspective and leave the numbers much to you guys.

Inari is a moderately novel device for DVT treatment. It is rapid and fairly not particularly cumbersome. It does an overall great to excellent job of clot removal and has applications for mainly iliac/IVC as well as PE (technically 2 different devices).

The thrombectomy world has been long in the making and gone through several iterations. This is not a new field/disease treatment. A large variety (> 4-5) devices have come and some gone. I will say that a few of the older/competitive devices did require a small upfront capital purchase (Angiojet), usually the company would give you the machine if you bought the catheters. The cost of Inari is currently exquisitely expensive. For reference, Inari basic device is around 10K for the department, where as an Angiojet is ballpark 2-4K.

Yes, Inari pushes the “no ICU” play hard, as would I. But truth being told, several of these patients are so sick/decompensated, I seriously doubt their overall LOS (length of stay) is dramatically different. Additionally, the purported no TPA/bleeds from other devices is vastly over sold, as I have never seen a bleed from TPA personally and been doing this many years.

I do think the device is good, don’t get me wrong. But i mostly fail to see how it fits in this board, in terms of SaaS/recurring revenue. It is no different than any atherectomy device I use, or dialysis catheter I place, of course I have to order another one. Same can be said with Medtronic Pacemakers, for everyone you place, got to keep your par level in the stock room even.

From a medical perspective, it is a great device, but the community does not see this a complete revolution in terms of care. Additionally, I know of several other devices in the pipeline which will be targeting VERY similar technologies and have seen their pitch, however have signed NDAs.

Overall, I’m sure it is a great company. They will undoubtedly be absorbed by one of the bigger players in the field (Boston Scientific, Bard, Cook, someone) and i’m sure the stock will go up. I may pick up a few for fun, but don’t put this in anywhere in the same ballpark as CRWD, NET, SE, DOCU.

Cheers - BloodPlumber

218 Likes

Sounds like BloodPlumber has had more hands on experience than I have, as our hospitals have not approved buying the console up front. I’m not sure if they offered a free console with a commitment to buy a certain number of catheters as some companies do. It might be a bit better or easier to use but we have other products that are cheaper or more versatile than the Inari. The ICU argument makes sense when comparing to old fashioned systemic thrombolysis or catheter thrombolysis but most places are using aspiration thrombectomy now.

As for the total potential cases, 400k out of 1 million potential cases seems like a lot although I suppose it depends on how they define a vein thrombosis case. I don’t really see any way they come close to that number given the available options and products from other companies in the pipeline. More likely they get absorbed like AngioVac.

35 Likes

Thanks, BloodPlumber, for your insider take. The issues you raised are why I’m keeping my position small. I’m just following the numbers on this. A company that goes from $7 million to $51 million to $140 million in two years obviously has a product that users like. As you said “From a medical perspective, it is a great device…”. As far as the cost of $9,000 per device, that seems to me to be trivial when you think what a single day in ICU would cost, or considering the cost of longterm use of thrombolytic medications. I have worried about significant competition arising and lack of a real moat of course, and will watch it carefully. Thanks again, and again I appreciate your insight and view from the field.
Saul

29 Likes

A company that goes from $7 million to $51 million to $140 million in two years obviously has a product that users like. As you said “From a medical perspective, it is a great device…”

In thinking about it further, a company that increased sales of medical devices from $51 million to $140 million in 2020, the year of Covid, when sales people were restricted in visiting hospitals etc, must be getting enormous word-of-mouth from users. In fact it must be blowing users away. I can’t think of any other explanation.

But I have absolutely no experience or knowledge in the field.

Best,

Saul

5 Likes

I’m not that kind of doctor, but I have to wonder whether Inari’s devices are being used to treat people with severe reactions to COVID. Perhaps those with more medical knowledge could weigh in here, but I could see that driving the trend for 2020 that Saul describes.

Dorset

4 Likes

Patients in the hospital with COVID have a fairly significantly increased rate of large vessel thrombotic events, both venous and arterial. These are often catastrophic, think large vessel strokes and large pulmonary emboli, especially in younger people in which there is then a hard core press to treat these events. I believe COVID has been a tailwind for such clot busting technologies. As COVID fades, I would expect these events to decrease, but I am by no means certain of this.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/ATVBAHA.120.315304

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009787

Approximately 5% of hospitalized patients and just under 9% of ICU patients had a thrombotic event.

I too am on the sidelines on this one. For the past 20 years, the newest rage in clot busting technology always seems to be coming along.

Best,
Jack

23 Likes

I’m not that kind of doctor, but I have to wonder whether Inari’s devices are being used to treat people with severe reactions to COVID. Perhaps those with more medical knowledge could weigh in here, but I could see that driving the trend for 2020 that Saul describes.

Yes, COVID seems to cause more clotting and with more people hospitalized (also a risk) there is anectdotally more clots. And since so many have lung problems, maybe a higher likelihood of patients needing to be treated more aggressively. I don’t know any studies but that seems to be the case with us.

We have still been able to have reps come to support cases after the initial month or two. And conferences have been cancelled. So I don’t think this is “word of mouth”. They really started selling just in the last couple years and obviously people will use the new device over old ones for a while until they gain experience with it and decide whether to keep using it or move on.

Also, as hospitals decide to review their budget they might say to use something else. As a smaller company, they are more at risk of being cut out.

Regarding the savings over an ICU stay, there are several other much cheaper devices that don’t require ICU stays. While $9k is much cheaper than a night in the ICU, the other alternative is a $1-2k catheter that also doesn’t require an ICU stay.

But as Saul points out, actual sales are what matter. A good sales team can sell an equivalent or even inferior device very well. I don’t know what the runway is here but I do believe they are at much higher risk of having growth drop off precipitously than most of the subscription services companies.

21 Likes

A word of caution re: the addressable market of 450000 pulmonary embolism (PE)/year, the “no need for ICU” and “no need for medication” assumptions made in several posts including the Inari web page.

According to the American Heart Association in 2016 there were about 370000 pulmonary embolisms and 857000 deep vein thromboses in the US. These numbers will likely be a bit higher for 2020 due to the CoVid pandemic.
However, not all pulmonary embolism will be amenable to catheter retrieval or need to be retrieved. Thanks to modern imaging studies we now detect embolisms we would have never detected or treated 15-20 years ago. Clot retrieval is reserved for the largest most life threatening clots, sitting in large veins where they can be retrieved; meaning the patient reaches the hospital and cath lab in time for the procedure and is still stable enough to tolerate it. Practically that means some massive and sub-massive clots. I can’t find incidence/prevalence numbers for this subgroup of PEs. But considering that in the US about 100000 death/year are attributable to PE of which roughly 25% “present” as sudden death, the addressable market in likely much smaller than roughly 450000/year.

While it is probably correct that a successful procedure reduces ICU days and the need for thrombolytic (blood clot dissolving) medication, this is only true for those patients who have “just” a pulmonary embolism. It ignores the fact that many patients are seriously ill (cancer, severe trauma, sepsis, etc.) that leads to the complication, PE, in the first place. They will still need ICU care and also often blood-“thinning” medication as the underlying problem that caused the blood clot in the first place doesn’t go away.

I can’t comment on the financials, which many on the board are very much expert at, but I would caution to believe the rather “rosy” promises of addressable market and outcomes made by the company. This will only be true for a small subsection of that patient population.

Thanking the board for the tremendous information and work you do to keep this board going,
Flöcky

36 Likes

Thanks a lot Saul, really helpful.

There is evidently a lot of skepticism about Inari, and that’s good. There should be skepticism about any little bio-tech or med-tech company. I almost never will invest in them. It’s just that I feel that this is a different kind of animal.

We aren’t dealing with a company with a great idea and several medications in Stage 1 trials with revenue coming in four or five years, or even one going into a Stage 3 trial, or one getting ready to apply to the FDA, but we have no idea what sales will be if they get approved a year from now.

This isn’t a company with a great idea for a medical device and just starting out, or one growing minuscule revenue at 30% but saying next year will be better

This isn’t… well you get the idea.

This company is net earnings positive for five of the last six quarters (missed in the big Covid quarter), and has even turned free cash flow positive. This company grew in 2019 from $7 million in revenue the year before to $51 million (2019 was long before any Covid “tailwind”), and then grew this year to $140 million. (That’s 7 to 140 in two years). This seems to be a company that found a niche, where no-one was happy with previous products and then boom, they came along. It’s like Zoom with its competitors. The product just works, and works better, and easier, and no one cares if the competitors are cheaper. You know, that does sound like Zoom. :grinning: I’m not saying that it’s going to grow like Zoom did. I’m just saying that it found a niche where there wasn’t a completely satisfactory product, and then suddenly there was, and it was easy to learn, easy to use, and it worked.

But look, I could be totally wrong about this. That’s just my uneducated opinion.

Saul

50 Likes

That’s just my uneducated opinion.

Saul,

You made me snort my soda through my nose.

Cheers
Qazulight

14 Likes

This seems to be a company that found a niche, where no-one was happy with previous products and then boom, they came along. It’s like Zoom with its competitors. The product just works, and works better, and easier, and no one cares if the competitors are cheaper. You know, that does sound like Zoom. :grinning: I’m not saying that it’s going to grow like Zoom did. I’m just saying that it found a niche where there wasn’t a completely satisfactory product, and then suddenly there was, and it was easy to learn, easy to use, and it worked.

I’m not sure if that’s just coming from the company (I think they are exaggerating or comparing apples to oranges) or just the rapid revenue growth. With regard to revenue growth, they went from 800 cases in 2019 to 5700 cases in 2019 and about 16,000 in 2020. 2019 numbers are basically trials. With 120 territories and 3700 cases we are talking about 10 cases per territory per month. I think they are very much in the low hanging fruit phase where they have a new device, take it to the big hospitals in the region that basically buy anything the doctors want, and get some people to use it for a while. There are a handful of these in each major market. When they expand to the smaller community hospitals, the value becomes a much bigger issue. I don’t think they are going to see net retention rates consistently over 100% because the number of patients simply doesn’t grow that quickly and at these hospitals there isn’t any kind of a learning curve for something like this. Once it gets installed, the doctors who decide they want to use it will use it as much as they possibly can. So it becomes a harder sell to smaller hospitals. Or they expand to new markets, though ABMD never really gained much traction outside of Japan and Germany if I recall, despite the fact that Impella didn’t have cheaper competitors.

I don’t know when that low hanging fruit runs out. It sounds like it’s run out in our region (close to their home base). Maybe their neighbors JNJ will try to buy them out at $10 billion or something. (I throw that out there just because of proximity and not anything I know). Maybe I have a distrust for these device companies that seem to be onto something but end up falling flat like another of their neighbors, Endologix (ELGX) [different situations, I know].

29 Likes