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.
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.
What stood out with the PIII as crap?
There was wording here that I must have overlooked. I thought the hydrocodone/NORCO that Elite submitted was an ER, not IR. For Nasrat to go this route he must be pretty darn sure of the SequestOx pathway. Interesting.
Feel free to tell the name of a broker. I call pure BS.
Simple article that provides a different view on the opiate crisis.
Except as of now EGLT is up as much as ELTP is down today. Go figure.
Washington Post article: Surgeons were told to stop prescribing so many painkillers. The results were remarkable.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/03/07/surgeons-were-told-to-stop-prescribing-so-many-painkillers-the-results-were-remarkable/?utm_term=.921b88e9bb07&wpisrc=nl_az_most&wpmk=1
The head of general surgery at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center had a remarkably simple idea not long ago: What if the department suggested that surgeons limit prescriptions of narcotic pain pills to a specific number for different kinds of operations?
The results were dramatic: The number of pills prescribed by doctors for five common outpatient surgeries dropped by 53 percent, and patients didn't consume all the pills they were given, according to a study that will be published this week in the journal Annals of Surgery.
Even veteran surgeons really had no idea how many opioids to send home with their patients, said Richard J. Barth, who is chief of general surgery at the medical center in New Hampshire and led the team that conducted the study.
“There weren’t really operation-specific guidelines out there before,” Barth said. “Doctors are very data-driven, and if there are specific guidelines, people are going to follow them.”
Overprescribing of opioids by doctors and other health-care providers is widely blamed for helping to start the epidemic now gripping the nation. Nearly 180,000 people have died of overdoses of prescription narcotics since 2000, and tens of thousands more have succumbed to overdoses of heroin and fentanyl as the crisis has evolved.
In recent years, a variety of interventions has been aimed at curbing overprescribing. Prescription-drug monitoring programs, now established in every state except Missouri, ask or require prescribers to check databases that show their patients' purchases of controlled substances, in an effort to cut down on “doctor shopping” and encourage physicians to offer fewer pills. Insurance companies have begun notifying doctors who are heavy prescribers of opioids in an attempt to bring them more in line with norms. And emergency-room physicians have been making a concerted effort to send patients home with the fewest possible opioids needed to control their pain.
Few if any of these projects are as simple as the effort undertaken by Barth and his colleagues. To come up with recommendations to pass along to surgeons, they first surveyed people who underwent one of five outpatient surgeries: partial mastectomy, partial mastectomy with a lymph-node biopsy, gall-bladder removal and two kinds of hernia repair. They discovered that the patients consumed only 28 percent of the opioids they were prescribed and that there was a wide range in prescribing habits on the part of the doctors.
Based on the results, they suggested to surgeons, orally and in writing, that they limit the number of narcotic pills to five and 10 for the two breast operations and 15 for the other three. They also told patients that they would most likely be able to manage their pain with nonnarcotic painkillers such as acetaminophen or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as ibuprofen.
The goal was twofold — to prevent long-term use of the painkillers by patients and to help block diversion of the pills to illegal users, who, Barth and his colleagues said, consume as much as 71 percent of legitimately prescribed opioids.
A follow-up survey of 224 patients showed that the total number of pills prescribed dropped from 6,170 before the education initiative to 2,932 afterward, a 53 percent decline. The average difference was greatest for partial mastectomies — the number of pills dropped from 19.8 to 5.1 for partial mastectomies and from 23.7 to 9.6 for partial mastectomies with a lymph-node biopsy.
Only one patient came back for a prescription refill.
“From the surgeon's standpoint, helping people unfortunately has the side effect of causing pain, and we want to relieve patients of their pain,” Barth said. Physicians are also under pressure from satisfaction surveys, conducted after procedures, that ask patients to rate how well providers managed their pain.
When the researchers surveyed 148 of the patients to determine the number of opioid pills they took, the numbers were equally startling. That group had been prescribed 1,913 pills but took only 656.
“Most doctors say: ‘I want to take care of their pain, and I don’t want them to have to come back and get a refill. So I’m going prescribe them a lot,’ ” Barth added. “The problem is there is a lot of cost to society.”
The study was not set up as a randomized controlled trial and therefore cannot definitively link the results to the education effort. But Barth noted that just four of the 34 surgeons in the study wrote half of the excessive prescriptions, and those surgeons had missed the education effort.
The research team is now compiling similar data for more-serious inpatient surgeries to determine whether they can curb overprescribing when those patients are sent home to recuperate.
“I think [the idea] has potential to have a big impact,” Barth said. “This could easily be done by other general surgeons all across the country.”
Ouch!!
I assume this post is a joke. Resubmission is later this year, assuming calendar Q4.
No comments here will help the PPS. Management needs to execute, but since SequestOx received a CRL it is now a dilution & waiting game.
Or maybe not? If they sell, the stock will plummet further. They are stuck between a rock & a hard place 100% reliant on the FDA at this point. We'll know in 2017 the true potential of the company.
The expectations here are so overblown and need a reality check. Probably these guys unloading all their shares.
Excellent point. Compare our form 4's to Buffalo Wild Wings. Activist investor in presentation yesterday called out that 667 stock transactions have taken place by management since 2003. Only one transaction was for an open market purchase and it was rather small and wasn't from CEO or COO. All rest have been sales. That is confidence for you. LOL
Funny that I am wrong on the Tmax. FDA seems to agree with my commentary. So do comments from Elite's CEO. Can't pick and choose. If I was wrong, SequestOx would be approved today. It is not due to the CRL. The CRL will delay it 2 years. Another fact for you.
Funny, as I said earlier. The future of the company is entirely in the FDA's hands at this point. The tech works or it doesn't. Original submission showed Tmax was unacceptable so they now had to reformulate the tech. Elite plans to submit later this year and hopefully we hear from the FDA in 1H2017.
That is a forward looking statement based on nothing right now. We have no clue what drugs are going to be pursued. We know they are making progress and will submit early 2018, but beyond that we have zero insight. An external investor can't add value based on nothing.
Also, you are completely ignoring all the intellectual property that China has and will continue to steal. That is their norm. Until their legislative framework around that changes it will always be a risk. Regardless, no potential sales to even calculate at this point.
I will look back. I understood that all used Elite's tech. I can also open a lemonade stand in my front yard and say I am in the $10 billion sports beverage industry. There is zero value to this yet.
There is some amazing potential with a quickly growing pipeline. Potential could be huge, but as of now tech is not validated on which the entire pipeline is built except for tiny sales get today.
SunGen is still based on our tech being validated. Too early to value anything here. Can't add value to unknown drugs.
Or perhaps they wanted to get close to the tech and have it for themselves. China has such a great respect for patents. LOL
Let me help you by putting two and two together. This may be too difficult to understand though.
The company is valued at generics it is selling today + hope in tech. The generic pipeline has little value for the PPS since the tech isn't yet proven.
Yes, it is based on generics it is selling today. Investors have been burned and wouldn't include a pipe dream until there is hint the FDA will move in a positive direction.
The whole intrinsic vs extrinsic trading value won't be realized until acquisition.
Yes and no. Upon FDA approval we will start seeing the real value of the pipeline be built into the PPS. This real value will replace the hope on which it is valued today. The company is trading beyond the worth of it's generics, but is not including the entire value of the ADT simply because it has been delayed & denied by the FDA and trust has been broken. There is a significant bridge that needs to be built with the investor base. As of now, that can only be built with concrete proof. His lack of open Q&A doesn't help either.
I don't buy it. There would already be an agreement in place. They bought Epic for the value added, not for Elite. If Elite's tech plays out that would be icing on the cake.
Except $2.10 estimate was before significant dilution & CRL crushing SequestOx expectations in 2015.
I don't think the pipeline is valued at all. I think it is HOPE in the pipeline that is keeping the stock afloat. Until the day we get a decent drug approved the pipeline can keep growing and growing, but I don't think the PPS will budge much at all. If the tech is valid, this leaves the door open for some nice appreciation if approvals do actually come to fruition, but until then this is an investment with a yes/no situation until then...and more often than not those are a gamble, not an investment.
Anyone know the initial Embeda potential back in 2011 when it first launched? I think it hit 70M under King and about a quarter of that after it was purchased, but was pulled shortly after it was bought.
Tech hasn't been approved yet. You can brag until your hearts content when approval is given on one of the AD drugs. Until then the only thing that is proven is crappy sales on selling scrap that is stalling fast. Even without SequestOx Elite has the potential to be a good company, but there even so there are a significant number of unknowns since we will partner for a sales force. Amazing sales on a crappy split still leaves us with an overly diluted company. Time is the only answer here assuming Nasrat plays his cards right.
It doesn't. Look at the financials. That proves it since all revenue now is from breadcrumbs. Let's let the approvals speak for themselves. If they do come, higher revenue is assured.
What's closer 52 week high or low?
Woohoo 6%. 3% after factoring in your typical inflationary trend. Jumping up for joy on that one. Those generics are seriously growing fast. Faster than anyone can see or measure for that case. So fast that mgmt needs to constantly use "timing" as an an excuse.
So what? Wouldn't be the first time the FDA has asked for changes. Won't be the last.
Yes, that is a reformulation, re-engineering, adjustment, modification, to fix the Tmax issue that the original could not muster.
Who said that they had to start over? They have a new formula that needs to be proven to both the FDA & Puracap.
Since when do bridging studies not need to prove end results?
Yep, R E S U L T S. Meaning new formula needs to prove it won't have same Tmax issues.
Clearly an agenda that is anything but balanced
So what? Means very little. If results aren't good, it all just becomes a sunk cost. $2.5 means they may be interested IF the new formula works. All it becomes is earnest money. Elite can walk away but they have no other options. Puracap can easily walk away and are only out 2.5M. Elite's future will be known in a few short months.
Of course, of course, because the terms & conditions are such a minor piece to the contract.
The facts also show that if the results do not come back positive there will be no Puracap agreement. It is all hypothetical at this stage. One thing that is certain is all of the uncertainty.
Pardon me, but there is nothing remotely factual about a potential relationship with Puracap. Nothing is set in stone. And why do you think negotiations are on hold until we get the study results? Because the tech still has to be proven. There is still uncertainty. If there wasn't an agreement would have been signed months ago. Experience is fantastic, but you can't ignore basic facts.
LOL! Still way shy of $2.10 NASDAQ keeps posting about. This story just gets better and better.