Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Drug manufacturers:
http://finviz.com/screener.ashx?v=111&f=ind_drugmanufacturersmajor&o=-marketcap
Drug approval reports by month:
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/index.cfm?fuseaction=Reports.ReportsMenu
Clinical Trials - Finding them
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/search/index
FDA Calendar
http://www.biopharmcatalyst.com/fda-calendar/
DUMP AMST MONDAY
If you are a long term player you will be able to get 4 or 5 times as many shares....AFTER the CRASH that is bound to happen here....if mgmt has ANY GOOD NEWS we would have already heard about it
1. Financials have already missed mgmts self imposed deadline
2. Rumors are floating that the STEMIXX product launch and climical trial results will ALSO miss their deadline
Will the FDA Kill Adult Stem Cell Medicine?
Should adult stem cells be a prescription drug controlled by the FDA or Standard Practice of Medicine?
Written By: Jeff Morris, AMMG and L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D
Date Published: May 1, 2009 | View more articles in: Bio View the Digital Edition | Sign Up
Printer-friendly versionsubscribe to h+ rss feeds Within the next five years, it's quite possible that physicians will come into routine possession of a remarkable set of tools — a brand new way of dealing with the frailty and disabilities of aging. The tool kit is autologous stem cells derived from the patients themselves, amplified in culture, and infused back into the patient according to a precise protocol. It would be such a leap from today's medical diagnostics and treatments; it could only be called revolutionary.
The purpose of employing autologous cells is to prevent rejection of histo-incompatible cells by the patient's immune system. But it's also possible that these new therapies could slip from our grasp, at least in the US. If we're not careful, these therapies could become the exclusive domain of the pharmaceutical industry, as regulated by the Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This could push the availability of this tool kit 15 to 20 years into the future. The opportunity-cost in terms of morbidity and mortality could be catastrophic.
Dr. Christopher J. Centeno, M.D., is an expert in this field, having spent four years performing an autologous, minimal culture-expansion technique in orthopedics that use adult mesenchymal stem cells. Known as the Regenexx™ procedure, it uses a patient’s own stem cells and hematogenous growth factors to regenerate bone and cartilage. At Regenerative Sciences, Inc. (where he also serves as Lab Director) and CentenoSchultz Clinic in Broomfield, CO (run with Co-Medical Director John R. Schultz, M.D.), the focus is on development of this non-surgical option for people suffering from a variety of orthopedic conditions. L. Stephen Coles spoke with Dr. Centeno for h+.
“The cell-therapy industry right now is very nascent; it’s where age-management was ten years ago,” he told me. Dr. Centeno has established an organization to define guidelines and standards called The American Stem Cell Therapy Association (ASCTA). “We’re trying to develop physician guidelines in the U.S. for the safe use of stem cells, similar to the way fertility clinics operate. We've got an organization to formulate guidelines, and we've got clinicians working to form a stem-cell registry. But the FDA doesn't appreciate that. We only do adult cells from the same person. But the FDA contends that if one cultures stem cells at all, regardless of the use of those cells, then it’s a prescription drug.” He points out that the age-management community has seen many instances where the FDA has tried to insert itself into the practice of medicine — although this has been strictly prohibited by Congress — and this is just the latest. “Compounding pharmacies have been coming under FDA pressure for a long time, and have now organized and set up their own standards and guidelines as a way to combat that interference.”
Dr. Centeno compares the current state of stem-cell medicine to that of fertility treatments. “If you’re an infertility specialist, you have to grow a woman’s fertilized oocytes at least to the blastocyst stage before implanting them, and the FDA has no control over that. If the FDA had gained control, you wouldn't have individual fertility practices — instead you'd have just a few big labs across the country.” Instead of being regulated by the FDA, fertility doctors are regulated state-by-state. The reason, says Dr. Centeno, is simple: “They organized, put their own standards in place, and created a case, saying, ‘Listen, this is the practice of medicine, and you, by charter, are not allowed to regulate the practice of medicine.’”
“You’re talking about replacing $60 billion in drug- and device-care with $6 billion in stem-cell care,” Dr. Centeno observes.
Prior to becoming involved in stem-cell research, Dr. Centeno was already an international expert and specialist in musculoskeletal, spinal, and neurologic injury. Having trained at the Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Medical Center, and the Institute for Rehabilitation Research, he is an M.D. who is double-boarded in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation as well as Pain Medicine. Dr. Centano has seen the results that are achievable in an orthopedic context. “We've done this for four years for patients with orthopedic conditions. So, as a test case, we know it can work safely and effectively.”
See Also
h+ Magazine Issue 2Stem Cell Therapy Today in the People's RepublicSelf-Assemble Me a New KidneyWatch Out, DarwinTo Dr. Centeno, it is inconceivable that a person’s own cells could be classified as a drug — but that's exactly what the FDA wants to do. “The FDA is working to protect the interests of Big Pharma,” he says. “If we wanted to insert some kind of new genes into these cells, we might all agree that could be a drug — a new entity. But what we're doing is simply culturing a person’s own cells. Most of the cells are bone-marrow derived; you can get them from synovial fluid in the knee or from other locations.” Basically, there are three main types of adult stem cells:
1.Mesenchymal stem cells are commonly found in the bone marrow. These cells can differentiate into multiple orthopedic, neural, organ, and other lineages.
2.Very Small Embryonic Like Cells (VSEL) are a newer stem-cell line and more likely to have the ability to differentiate into multiple cell types and lineages.
3.CD34+ heme progenitors are usually derived from bone marrow and can be mobilized into the bloodstream. They have been used commonly in vascular and cardiac applications.
Most importantly, the mesenchymal cell line alone — the one Regenexx has been using — has more than 8,000 peer-reviewed citations showing its wide application in age-management medicine, including the treatment not just of orthopedic conditions, but of Type-II Diabetes, stroke, and cardiovascular disease. “It can be used to treat everything from cardiac disease after a heart attack, to vascular disease, to orthopedic injuries,” notes Dr. Centeno.
As we move beyond “Regenerative Medicine 1.0” - which is where Dr. Centeno sees things currently: “I suspect what will happen, in 2.0, is that you'll see some age-management-medicine doctors start their own regenerative stem-cell lab, take cells derived from a patient, minimally culture them, and then they can be deployed.” For instance, in cases of diabetes, the cultured cells would be injected under CT or ultrasound guidance directly into the Islets of Langerhans in the pancreas. There, according to Dr. Centeno, “in animal models, they routinely cure diabetes.”
It's important to note that, while the recently lifted ban on embryonic stem-cell research federal-funding by President Obama on March 9th has helped to focus attention to the whole subject of stem-cell-based therapies, including iPSC's (induced Pluripotent Stem Cells derived from a skin biopsy), the work that ASCTA does is exclusively linked to 'adult' stem cells… and the patient’s own stem cells at that. “A large number of diseases have already been looked at,” notes Dr. Centeno; “The basic research is already in place.” As presented in a “list-in-progress” on the ASCTA website, areas involved in ongoing research on the use of adult stem cells in disease treatment clearly overlap with areas of embryonic stem-cell research:
•ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis) or Lou Gehrig's Disease
•Alzheimer's Disease
•Parkinson's Disease
•Multiple Sclerosis
•Muscular Dystrophy
•Osteoarthritis
•Rheumatoid Arthritis
•Spinal-Cord Injury
•Stroke
In terms of treating age-related conditions, Dr. Centeno sees stem-cell therapies as an entirely new level of medicine. “In 1.0, we use hormones,” he explains. “Treating using hormones is great, but at some point the parts wear out and that’s where 2.0 comes in.” As an example, Dr. Centeno cites a study that was just presented at the American College of Cardiology Conference in Orlando, FL, showing a dose-response relationship on repairing the heart after an Acute Myocardial Infarction, with improved heart function after stem-cell injection.
On March 31, 2009 HealthDay News reported on a U.S. study that found that "treating a heart attack with the patients own bone-marrow stem cells boosts blood flow within the heart and may help reduce long-term complications." The study included 31 patients who underwent angioplasty and stent placement after a heart attack. Within one week of the attacks, 16 of the patients received infusions of their own bone-marrow cells into the coronary artery in which a blockage had caused the event.
The 16 patients received different amounts of bone marrow stem cells -- 5 million, 10 million, and 15 million cells. The 15 patients in the control group received standard medication only. All the patients were followed for up to five years. "After three to six months, patients who received higher doses of bone-marrow stem cells showed greater improvement in blood flow within the heart than patients who received lower doses and those in the control group," the researchers said.
In a news release, Principal Investigator Dr. Arshed Quyyumi, a Professor of Medicine at Emory University School of Medicine said: "This is critical information for future study design — the more cells a patient receives, the more beneficial effect we see in the heart," The researchers also found that higher doses of bone-marrow stem cells appeared to help cardiac function, as determined by measuring the percentage of blood pumped out with each heartbeat (Ejection Fraction), and by measuring the amount of tissue death (infarction) due to inadequate blood supply. However, these results were not considered statistically significant, the researchers stressed.
"These results show that treatment with a patient's own bone-marrow stem cells has the potential to reduce long-term complications after a heart attack. We are encouraged by these results and are planning to conduct a more extensive study," Quyyumi said.
“Until now there was no way to treat that,” observes Dr. Centeno. “Obviously, if you are a heart specialist or cardiologist this is of big interest to you.”
One key to treatments using a patient’s own stem cells is to gather and bank those cells in advance. “The number available for treatment declines with age,” Dr. Centeno points out.
“In a 60-year-old person we might get 60,000; we can grow that in a lab to a million, which is enough to treat a condition. It’s what the body does, but the body can't always get a sufficient number to the right place at the right time. If someone enters your practice at 40, just starting to see the consequences of aging, you would remove those cells and freeze them.” Though this sounds relatively simple, the prospects for such treatments in the future rest squarely on developing industry standards in the near term. “There are already companies doing that stem-cell freezing,” Dr. Centeno notes. “The problem is that if the FDA has its way, nobody will be able to use those cells because they will be considered a prescription drug. You won't be able to use them in any meaningful way; you must incubate them to get them out of the cryogenic state because it’s a delicate process” - and that’s what the FDA considers 'turning the cells into a drug'.
Thus, while development of stem-cell standards and guidelines is a work in progress, it is one about which there is a real sense of urgency. “All of this could be done within the next 12 months; we could have hundreds of people across the country doing this work under the ASCTA Guidelines,” explains Dr. Centeno. “We could get out of the starting gate very quickly if everyone gets on board; otherwise, the window is going to shut and it will never happen.”
The stakes for the pharmaceutical industry are obviously also high. “You’re talking about replacing $60 billion in drug- and device-care with $6 billion in stem-cell care,” Dr. Centeno observes. The end result will either be individual physicians owning and controlling labs, or, says Dr. Centeno, “It will all be controlled by Big Pharma, and innovation will move at a snail’s pace.”
Interview with Dr. Christopher J. Centeno, M.D
By L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Visiting Professor of Computer Science UCLA School of Engineering for h+ Los Angeles, California
Dr. Centeno is an international expert and specialist in musculoskeletal, spinal, and neurologic injury. He is an M.D. who is double-boarded in both Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and in Pain Medicine. He trained at the Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Medical Center, and the Institute for Rehabilitation Research. Dr. Centano utilizes a traditional medical approach blended with alternative and research-based treatments. He is Medical Director of The Centeno-Schultz Clinic and the Spinal Injury Foundation, and Scientific Co-chair of the International Whiplash Trauma Congress, which draws scientists together from all over the world. He is Co-Editor-in-Chief of the new peer reviewed medical journal, Whiplash and Related Disorders published by Haworth Medical Press, as well as the author of the medical text, The Spine Dictionary. Dr. Centano practices in Denver, North Denver, and Boulder, Colorado.
L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., is Co-Founder ?Los Angeles Gerontology Research Group?
h+: When did you begin your clinical work on adult stem-cell therapeutics?
CHRISTOPHER CENTENO: I started in 2005, and the very first question I had to address was whether I needed approval from the FDA to infuse autologous culture-expanded stem cells derived from patient tissue back into that same patent or whether such procedures ought to be considered part of the normal practice of medicine. We obtained opinions from three different attorneys. Their opinion was that what we’re doing was, in fact, "the practice of medicine," so the FDA had no jurisdiction. The FDA recently has asserted that it’s their belief that autologous stem cells are the equivalent of a prescription drug. But this is a position we dispute.
h+: Does that mean that the FDA could consider a patient's own cells -- when infused back into the patient -- as a "prescription drug" that would fall under their regulatory guidelines, requiring a full set of Phase-I, -II, and -III Clinical Trials that could take five years or more and cost millions of dollars?
CC: Yes, that's right. And it's even more complex than that. If the procedure were done in the physician's office, but done over more than one day, then the FDA could claim that they should have jurisdiction, since the cells would then be considered a drug according to their perspective. When a federal agency is looking to expand its charter (the scope of activities it seeks to regulate), it may well infringe on the practice of medicine unless doctors stand up for what is rightfully their practice.
h+: Has the FDA issued any draft guidelines regarding their intention to regulate autologous stem-cell therapies that take place in a doctor's office?
CC: Not with regard to "the practice of medicine," just with regard to drugs. The FDA website concerning this topic is "Eligibility Determination for Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps)" (see "Resources" below).
h+: Has your own organization American Stem Cell Therapy Association (ASCTA) issued similar guidelines?
CC: Yes, and they are even more specific to autologous stem-cell therapy than the FDA's own guidelines, which derive from a 50-year tradition of drug regulation.
h+: Have you worked with animal models to provide the safety component of a pre-clinical trial?
CC: There are hundreds of animal model studies with mesenchymal stem cells. There is published research on rats, dogs, and pigs to demonstrate the safety of autologous mesenchymal stem cells infused into the lumbar spine, so we know that they are safe for these animals. Furthermore, veterinarians have been using these treatments for expensive racehorses afflicted with arthritis or inflamed ligaments to positive effect. Nevertheless, there is no substitute for human studies, as compared with animal models, for patient treatment. Each species presents unique problems in terms of calculating the dose of cells, route of administration, and establishing the optimal time for treatment-onset following trauma or a chronic condition.
Calculating the treatment regimen over several months is also species specific. We hope to establish our guidelines in collaboration with a community of stem-cell physicians who are working in this area.
See Also
•h+ Magazine Issue 2
•Stem Cell Therapy Today in the People's Republic
•Self-Assemble Me a New Kidney
•Watch Out, Darwin
Resources: FDA Report "Eligibility Determination for Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps)"
http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/tissdonor.htm
ASCTA Standards Related to Adult Stem Cells
www.stemcelldocs.org
Regenerative Sciences, Inc.
http://www.regenexx.com/
CentenoSchultz Clinic
http://www.centenoclinic.com/
Journal of Whiplash and Related Disorders
http://journalseek.net/cgi-bin/journalseek/journalsearch.cgi?field=issn&query=1533-2888
The Spine Dictionary
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/156053270X/o/qid=933217591/sr=8-1/002-0319993-7261203
Dr. Stephen J. Cole (Gerontology Research Group)
http://www.grg.org?
E-mail: scoles@grg.org? E-mail: scoles@ucla.edu
FDA’s position on adult stem cells
http://cellmedicinesociety.org/faq
Please take the time to send off the suggested note towards the end of the article.
FDA’s position on adult stem cells is contained in multiple places and can be tough to decipher.
Basically, to treat disease, your adult stem cells need to be grown a bit ( incubated) in culture. If you don't do this, the stem cells are unlikely to help the patient. However, FDA's current regulatory framework makes this type of cell culture the manufacture of a new drug, essentially removing cell therapy from your doctor black bag (until the FDA approves your stem cells as drugs for each and every medical condition). So while your doctor could do all of this safely in a physician run lab and begin treating a host of diseases, you have to wait 5-20 years for access to your own stem cells (as a drug).
So what's the public health rationale for why you would want to regulate the patient's own stem cells as a drug? If we look at mass production of anything such as food, drugs or someone cells placed in a vial, the public health implications can be tremendous. A bad batch of food or drugs can make allot of people very sick very quickly. However, an autologous procedure is very different, in that it involves taking one person's tissue and placing it back into the same person. For example, disease transmission risks from one person to another don't apply; the idea of one "bad batch" of anything making many people sick doesn't apply. The worst that can happen is that one person gets sick from something that happened to their own tissue. This is therefore not something for mass production rules, but rather things like professional treatment guidelines and implantation registries.
As we have been discussing, the FDA’s position on your adult stem cells is that they are biological drugs. How did this happen? FDA’s definition of stem cells (a type of ‘”human cell, tissue, or cellular or tissue-based products” (HCT/Ps)) is found at 21 CFR § 1271.3(d).
As revealed HERE, that definition has undergone a very significant change over the past five years. Originally, HCT/P was defined as follows: “any human tissue derived from a human body and intended for transplantation into another human…” Now, however, HCT/P is defined as “articles containing or consisting of human cells or tissues that are intended for implantation, transplantation, infusion, or transfer into a human recipient.” Thus, the regulation currently in effect purports to give FDA the authority to regulate even those tissue products being used for autologous purposes (i.e. tissue products being used in a bypass surgery), and therefore gives the FDA more authority than Congress has ever authorized. Congress does not hide elephants in mouse holes, and it has never granted FDA the authority to regulate the practice of medicine.
Why is this important? The FDA made these changes to the law without public comment. Federal law provides that the FDA cannot make new regulations without noticing the public and offering the public the opportunity to comment. In this case, had the FDA noticed the public of a proposed change to 21 CFR § 1271.3(d), the proposed change would have infuriated doctors and others involved in medical procedures because the new regulation purports to give the FDA authority to regulate the practice of medicine.
Why make this change? What was in it for FDA? By changing one simple phrase, the agency has given itself new sweeping powers to regulate stem cells as biological drugs. In fact, the very existence of CBER (the cell based therapy group at FDA) depends on this little change of phrase. Without it, the FDA has no authority to regulate the patient’s own stem cells as a drug. But with it, FDA gives itself unheard of authority and a whole new section of the federal government has a reason to exist.
Please take a minute right now to send the following to the FDA/Ombudsman (feel free to edit/add your own comments):
Dear sirs,
I oppose the change made in 21 CFR § 1271.3(d) from “any human tissue derived from a human body and intended for transplantation into another human…” (2004 and prior) to “articles containing or consisting of human cells or tissues that are intended for implantation, transplantation, infusion, or transfer into a human recipient.” (recent regulation). This change allows FDA to regulate the practice of medicine, even though Congress never gave the FDA such power. Please put this regulation change to public comment as is required by law.
Asthma and COPD Inhalers That Contain Ozone-depleting CFCs to be Phased Out; Alternative Treatments Available
For Immediate Release: Apr. 13, 2010
Media Inquiries: Erica Jefferson, 301-796-4988,
erica.jefferson@fda.hhs.gov
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm208302.htm
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced, in accordance with longstanding U.S. obligations under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, seven metered-dose inhalers (MDI) used to treat asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) will be gradually removed from the U.S. marketplace. These inhalers contain ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which are propellants that move medication out of the inhaler and into the lungs of patients. Alternative medications that do not contain CFCs are available.
The affected products and their phase out schedule include:
Inhaler Medication
Last Date to be manufactured, sold or dispensed in U.S. Manufacturer
Tilade Inhaler (nedocromil)
June 14, 2010
King Pharmaceuticals
Alupent Inhalation Aerosol (metaproterenol)
June 14, 2010
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals
Azmacort Inhalation Aerosol (triamcinolone)
Dec. 31, 2010
Abbott Laboratories
Intal Inhaler (cromolyn)
Dec. 31, 2010
King Pharmaceuticals
Aerobid Inhaler System (flunisolide)
June 30, 2011
Forest Laboratories
Combivent Inhalation Aerosol (albuterol and ipratropium in combination)
Dec. 31, 2013
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals
Maxair Autohaler (pirbuterol)
Dec. 31, 2013
Graceway Pharmaceuticals
Patients using the inhalers scheduled to be phased out should talk to their health care professional about switching to one of several alternative treatments currently available. Until then, patients should continue using their current inhaler medication.
CFCs are harmful because they deplete the ozone layer miles above the Earth that absorb some of the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. The United States has banned the general use of CFCs in consumer aerosols for decades, and eliminated the production of CFCs in the United States as of Jan. 1, 1996, except for certain limited uses, such as MDIs.
“During this transition, FDA wants to ensure that patients have access to safe and effective alternative medications to treat their asthma or COPD,” said Badrul Chowdhury, M.D., Ph.D., director of the Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Rheumatology Products in FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “We are currently working with professional societies and patient organizations to make sure patients understand which products will no longer be available and have information on which alternative medication might work best for them.”
The CFC phase out is part of an international agreement to ban substances that deplete the Earth’s ozone layer. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and the U.S. Clean Air Act aim to protect the public health and the environment from the potentially negative effects of ozone depletion. Bans on products containing CFCs began in the late 1970s.
The decision to phase out the products is the latest in a series of decisions related to the removal of CFC inhaler products from the market as required by the Clean Air Act. The agency proposed to phase-out the seven remaining products in 2007 and reached a final decision after reviewing more than 4,000 public comments and information submitted as part of a public meeting.
For more information:
Seven Inhalers That Use CFCs Being Phased Out1
Phase Out of CFC Metered-Dose Inhalers2
Metered-Dose Inhalers Clean Air Act Information3
Drug Treatments for Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease that Do Not Use Chlorofluorocarbons4
Interesting post. Thanks... ;)
FDA crackdown in progress
FDA cracking down on fat-melting injections
By MATTHEW PERRONE, AP Business Writer Matthew Perrone, Ap Business Writer – 44 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The Food and Drug Administration is cracking down on what are billed as fat-melting injections used in spas across the U.S., saying the drugs have not been proven safe or effective.
Lipodissolve injections, a popular nonsurgical alternative to liposuction, are used to dissolve small fat deposits around the legs, arms and belly. The FDA said Wednesday the drugs have not been cleared by federal scientists, as required by law.
The agency issued warning letters to a half-dozen spas that offer the injections, citing them for making unsubstantiated claims about lipodissolve therapy.
"The claims made for your lipodissolve products are false and misleading in that they are not supported by substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience," states a letter to All About You Medspa in Madison, Ind.
Other spas cited by the FDA included: Pure Med Spa of Boca Raton, Fla., Monarch Med Spa of King of Prussia, Pa., and three others.
The Web site for Monarch Med Spa claims that, "Rather than go through the pain and discomfort associated with liposuction, patients now have the option of a series of injections with very minimal discomfort."
Calls to Monarch Med Spa were not immediately returned Wednesday.
FDA regulators called on the spas to stop using such claims and notify the agency within 15 working days of steps they are taking to correct the violations.
"FDA is not aware of any credible scientific evidence to support these claims," said Kathleen Anderson, an FDA deputy director, on a call with reporters.
Spas that offer the injections say they are safe and effective. But public safety advocates have called for proof and urge patients to think twice before paying thousands of dollars for an unproven procedure.
FDA said it has received reports of permanent scarring and hard lumps on patients' skin, as well as skin deformations after receiving the therapy.
The FDA also issued a warning to a Brazilian company that sells lipodissolve treatments on two Web sites: zipmed.net and mesoone.com.
Lipodissolve and similar treatments use two chemicals, phosphatidylcholine, or PC, and sodium dioxycholate, or DC. Those chemicals occur naturally in the human body, but that doesn't necessarily make them safe, said Lenox Hill Hospital plastic surgeon Dr. Jennifer Walden.
"They are used in the metabolic process of our bodies to break down fat, but they were never intended to be extracted, mixed with other ingredients and reinjected to break down fat," said Walden.
Phosphatidylcholine is found in the FDA-approved drug Infasurf, which is used to treat respiratory problems in premature infants, according to the FDA.
According to Walden, lipodissolve injections are often performed by beauty care specialists who have little or no medical training.
Lipodissolve formulations are usually mixed at medical spas through a process called compounding, in which a pharmacist combines multiple drugs to create a new formulation, Walden said. The FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine and declined to discuss drug compounding.
"We're not aware of where these spas are getting their drugs, therefore we cannot comment on the issue of compounding this product," said FDA pharmacist Samia Nasr.
The FDA urged physicians who are using the drugs cosmetically to submit an approval application for regulatory review.
BOARD fight......takeover possible at AVII
National Institute of Clinical Research
http://nicresearch.com/
You may find this one interesting.
The Current CEO of AMST used to be the Director. I found it looking up his history. ;) He sure must know a lot about prepping things for FDA approval.
Thanks Bio Im almost scared to read it !LOL
we dont think you will regret that.......he told me back at .50
FDA invades Genzyme plant.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fda-finds-genzyme-plant-out-of-compliance-2010-03-24
Between the two of you I think I need to take a closer look at NNVC.
ding ding ding ding...chaching!
time to get some is NOW; no one can cry to us at $5 or $10...we toldem here and now
I havent found any #s I dont like yet
An their burn rate is $200k-300k per month...or lower if they want/need it to be.
Yep...if this works as well as we think it's worked to date in vitro and invivo...as I've said...ba ba ba ba boomdeaye!!!! How many viruses are out there...hmmm?
damn........the balance sheet aint to shabby either....like that current ratio of 4/1
when I read this is the 10Q all I could do is say wow
If the viral load reduction seen in the preliminary animal study by a nanoviricide in comparison with HAART therapy proves to be predictive of benefit, then we can estimate that the anti-HIV nanoviricide alone or perhaps in combination with one or more components of the existing arsenal of drugs may provide what has been called a “functional cure” against HIV. A total cure is a state in which all virus, including copies of its genome integrated into human cells, is eliminated from the body, so that the virus infection does not exist and cannot recur. A functional cure can be paraphrased as a drug treatment which practically eliminates substantially all circulating virus, so that therapy can be stopped until a new recurrence happens after a significantly prolonged time interval. Thus, patients can live worry-free lives for years before requiring treatment again.
Hot diggety damn............ba boom
Bio could be But I thought it was the current one .
Pharma likes reform........cnbc video
http://www.cnbc.com/id/35948819
lock I think the one you have there is the old house bill before changes because it still has public option...............from your site:
(B) creates a new Health Insurance Ex11
change, with a public health insurance option
12 alongside private plans;
13
for everyone else you were talking about NNVC and I agree
Hi bioman...I think we've got a lot more upside here. IMO, should the street begin to to believe that this company truly has the ability to neutralize viruses...this stock will be at a permanently higher level...a much higher permanent level. Still a strong buy here as I see it. The fun is only just beginning. Lot of volume last week...hmmm?
Excellent point.
In Reply To 'biomanbaba'
health bill passes
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100322/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul
What should matter to investors is that 32 million more Americans will be buying drugs........soon
VVUS on the verge of FDA action
http://ir.vivus.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=447799
NNVC........my friend SMOOTH gave me this one; on my watch list for a while....moving lately
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=45114384
the chart
http://stockcharts.com/c-sc/sc?s=NNVC&p=D&yr=0&mn=6&dy=0&i=p25650043489&r=1510
and you also 8=>)
Why thank you. ;)
Have a great day! I'm out the door now. ...
lol........Im your #102
Well, on that note...membermark for you. I think I should be following you. ;)
Biotech isnt for the faint of heart......as you well know...one in thirty firms launch a product......finding the one has been my game since 1995. No other industry offers years of govt sponsored monopoly to firms launching a product...or offers the investor a chance to go from nothing to big big sales overnight....I love it
prices have corrected after the run up.......Im looking for a bottom to get in
Btw, I just posted your info a couple of other places.
More stem cell and disease oriented...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=48069896
More focused on cord blood banking...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=48069906
CYTX definitely has a lot going for it. Good article. ;)
I greatly appreciate the link. I'll be joining you in the checking it daily. ;)
checking that calender is a piece of fundamental and general DD...like reading WSJ or checking my mail here.......I do it daily
here is another you might find interesting
http://seekingalpha.com/article/182039-joe-feshbach-s-highest-conviction-position-a-regenerative-medicine-game-changer
GERN is mentioned in this video:
Where America Stands: Stem Cell Research
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6305502n&tag=related;photovideo
That media attention you speak of will end up fast tracking a lot of treatments. Hoards are watching these trials with promise and hope.
Followers
|
1
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
62
|
Created
|
03/14/10
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderators |
FDA: http://www.fda.gov/
News & Events: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/default.htm
Drug approval reports by month: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/index.cfm?fuseaction=Reports.ReportsMenu
Medical devices approval and clearances:
Clinical Trials: http://www.fda.gov/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/RunningClinicalTrials/default.htm
Cellular & Gene Therapy Products:
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/CellularGeneTherapyProducts/default.htm
Advisory Committee Calendar:
http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm
Related Links of Interest:
National Institute of Clinical Research
All messages, including iBox content, are the opinion of the posters, are no substitute for your own research, and should not be relied upon for stock trading or any other purpose.
Rules of the board according to IHUB:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/complex_terms.asp
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |