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.
<In France, following the results of a clinical study in Marseille, there is considerable interest for the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 disease, and the French Ministry of Health recently allowed the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 disease pending the results of ongoing clinical trials (3).
In their study, Gautret et al. reported a 100% viral clearance in nasopharyngeal swabs in 6 patients after 5 and 6 days of the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin (3).
This rate of viral clearance was lower with hydroxychloroquine alone (57.1%) and was only 12.5% in patients who did not receive hydroxychloroquine (p< 0.001)
.
Such a rapid and full viral clearance was quite unexpected and we wished to assess in a prospective study virologic and clinical outcomes of 11 consecutive patients hospitalized in our department who received hydroxychloroquine (600 mg/d for 10 days) and azithromycin (500 mg Day 1 and 250 mg days 2 to 5) using the same dosing regimen reported by Gautret et al. (3).
There were 7 men and 4 women with a mean age of 58.7 years (range: 20-77), 8 had significant comorbidities associated with poor outcomes (obesity: 2; solid cancer: 3; hematological cancer: 2; HIV-infection: 1).
These pts were very high risk and quite advanced.
-Virus is undetectable in 37C after after 2 days
Something is not right:
- 37C is very low fever for 2 days and COVID19 must be dead but
- It is not a case
Government regulations make almost impossible for new capable companies to enter the medical mask production. They are regulated similar to medical devices.
S. Korea, Japan, and Israel are doing also very well. Why?
PS
Scientific progress requires a free exchange of ideas and points of view. Labeling other people views one disagrees with conspiracy theories does not benefit and/or promote knowledge and truth. Scientific discoveries require to accept "unthinkable".
My common sense tells me that pneumonia must be prevented at any cost.
There are vaccines for bacterial pneumonia. Are there any benefits from vaccination against bacterial pneumonia for COVID19 pts?
By th way, Regular pneumonia infects ~500,000 annually in America with ~25,000 deaths.
I’m not sure whether I would take HCQ + (AZT+ Zinc) as a treatment in the early stages of a COVID-19 infection; I hope I don’t have to make such a decision.
I can understand your point of view. But there is a good reasoning (based on our present very limited understanding of COVID15) to use HCQ + AZT+ Zinc early.
I agree that immune system weakens with age.
The flu vaccine for older people is much powerful than a regular vaccine given to everybody else. It is the fact.
The question: what are the drivers? Is there a simple explanation?
Something is "funny" about COVID19 behavior. It appears to be too smart multi-stage virus.
May be it is a very stupid question BUT
What are the drivers making immune system effective?
Any guess with younger people handle COVID19 much better than older ones?
Are these immune system differences, vaccinations or what?
PS
My friend also mentioned that COVIR19 is a synthetic virus and may be will not mutate "properly".
Speaking about ventilators for COVID19 patients.
I spoke to a person who owns a ICU hospital in NY. He said that only 14% of pts on ventilation survive and the most of survivals are permanently damaged. Consequently, his advice: treatment must be started ASAP except for pts with none-to-low risk factors.
In absence of good treatment options, testing as many people as possible for COVID19 and isolating test-positives as well as ALL wearing masks. Instead, the officials including CDC are playing propaganda and disinformation games covering their mistakes and shortcomings.
Any comments/thoughts about Coronavirus?
Thanks
Any link to 38th Annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference agenda?
"“Phase-1” US-China deal boosts IP protection "
I don't think so.
dangerM
Please provide ref to Roche slides.
LLY has made a good deal and BMY almost killed Erbitux and ImClone.
After all ARQL has made it.
CLVS situation is very simple:
- Prior to the last CLVS CC, CLVS was priced for a bankruptcy. AZN, once again, overplayed CLVS management in the Profound prostate Ph3 clinical trial.
-- Prior to ESMO 2019, AZN reported that the trial has met its milestones being superior to evaluating the efficacy and safety of LYNPARZA versus enzalutamide or abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who have progressed on prior treatment with a new hormonal anticancer treatment and have a qualifying tumor mutation in one of 15 genes involved in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway, among them BRCA 1/2, ATM and CDK12.
-- CLVS has panicked and heavily diluted its stock issuing convertible notes
-- Then came ESMO the results, Olaparib was superior to enzalutamide or abiraterone in BRCA1/2 but ATM did not show benefits. ORR for olaparib and Rucaparib were close. It became obvious that Olaparib did not show the superiority over Rucaparib but it was expected that Rucaparib also would be superior to enzalutamide or abiraterone in BRCA 1/2 pts. Therefore, no knockdown punch took place for Rucaparib.
-- Finally, olaparib was tested in 2nd-line and rucaparib was tested in 3rd-line prostate pts. So it was not a head-on comparison. There is no a single trial indicating Rucaparib is inferior to other PARPs with a good safety profile.
- From marketing point of view, Rucaparib is well behind olaparib as monotherapy clinical trials in ovarian pts. But the combo trial data of PARP drugs with other drugs are not there yet. This is where the future. In my view, olaparib and keytruda combo preliminary results are so-so. BMY and Roche are running combo trials of their leading drugs with rucaparib in TNBC, Gastric, Prostate, etc., The preliminary results are expected in the next 3-12 months.
- Add to this Lucitanib in combo with Rucaparib and Nivolumab in many solid tumor including NSCLC, ovarian, breast, etc.,
3 weeks ago, CLVS was priced at $280M and with 53 clinical trials in progress paid also by Roche, BMY, and others.
As of today, BMY and Roche know more about Rucaparib than CLVS itself.
Thanks
Is BGNE a drug developer or just a trial-running company?
Thanks in advance
When one invests in a company, one is buying its management services.
So far, ENTA's management has done a good job for the company. I think it is too early to give them an advice how to run the company.
<Enta's endeavors into other fields are nothing but a waste of lucrative income.>
It is easy to cut off ENTA's expenses following an acquisition.
As I mentioned, at the last AM, ENTA's management clearly stated that NASH treatment had to be a combo approach.
The results are not spectacular but it may be too early to write out ENTA from future major NASH players.
PS
1 mg treatment arm does not look too bad.
<Trump Vows To Retaliate To China Ordering US Companies To Find "An Alternative To China">
It takes a lot of time and a lot of money to move complex manufacturing to 3rd world countries. If it was possible to do everything using robots, it would not be necessary to move manufacturing oversea in a first place.
The most difficult part is to educate & train people to do quality jobs. For China, this process took more than 35 years. Just look at India, they are still unable to do anything right. Good many Indian medications are just outright fake.
Something is not right when a public company makes a private deal God knows with who and under undisclosed conditions.
Also, the CLVS stock price behavior during the last month is a suspect. After all, it took at least 4-6 weeks to negotiate, approve, and authorize the deal. After all, nobody gives away $250M.
As for CLVS urgency to make this deal exchanging old convert notes for the new ones, the old convert notes were not due until 2021 and were at much more favorable conditions to CLVS than the new converts due to 2024.
<TGTX - CEO buys 50,000 shares at $7.04 up roughly 14% on the day.
CEO now owns 12,878,185 shares>
It is not exactly him. It is more some offshore trust accounts.
"What metrics are you using to declare Enta being a very undervalued company?"
It is easy to discuss/predict the sale of established drugs in the next few quarters. But things do change drastically in science/engineering quite often making long-term predictions (longer than 1-2 years) very difficult.
ENTA is one of the very few biotechs with very good science who can deliver.
To succeed in science/engineering, it is necessary to be good and/or lucky. Average players are lucky sometimes but very good players succeed consistently. ENTA management indeed slow but their science capabilities are very good. Consequently, I think they have a good chance to succeed in NASH or HBV with a big payoff for the investors.
Due,
In my vocabulary: LLY lumicitabine has failed in RSV. The program has been terminated.
Disagree. ENTA is a very undervalued company. It is a company that can deliver a disease cure.
Too many companies compare their clinical results with placebos and call it miracles where any improvements, specifically in oncology.
"The market" reaction was even more overblown as if ENTA's trial was a total failure. Since there is no competition, any positive results can be judged as a success.
Some people are trying to compare the ENTA data with the failed J&J Ph3 trial. Keep in mind that these drugs are not the same.
Difficult to argue to the contrary.
NASH is for sure. I am not sure about HBV and RSV treatments but he mentioned more than one application.
When you ask Luly a question, you get a 15-minutes answer...I do respect his expertise. In the last 5 years, most of his predictions were correct although these predictions very often contradicted the industry thinking.
Speaking about Enta's AM discussions, Luly stated that similar to the HCV treatment, he expects that NASA and RSV treatments will be drug combinations.
Consequently, ENTA will be looking for a partner(s) with scientific expertise to complement their own expertise.
In general, Luly and others sounded upbeat.
Too much money is floating around thanks to FED's ZIR policies.
It is another indication that money cannot buy everything. In science, talents & expertise are the real drivers.
PS
I did attend the latest ENTA's AM. They sounded confident in what they are doing.
It was also an interesting discussion regarding the ENTA future partnering approaches for its different pipeline candidates (assuming they are promising/successful). It would substantially cut the number of potential candidates.
Any idea why ARQL flys to the moon?
Another move like this and ARQL and ENTA will have a close Market Cap. Incredible.
<Among the challenges confronting companies like Roche seeking to sell the new gene therapies is gaining reimbursement. Spark has said it plans to sell Luxturna in the U.S. at a cost of $850,000 a patient."
Are they totally insane?
BMY—Opdivo/Yervoy (chemo-free) regimen shows in mCRPC:
"Grade three to five treatment-related adverse events occurred in 42% of patients in cohort 1 and 53% of patients in cohort 2"
The same ENTA slides I remember 3-5 years ago.
I am afraid they need a partner to speed them up.
<The formulation and method-of-use patents that ABBV has used to keep Humira biosimilars off the market in the US until 2023 did not stand up to challenge in Europe. >
Makes sense to me!
I read an article stating that Rucaparib did not work for ALL expected subgroups!? What a surprise!