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.
RE: AVNR, what am I missing?
Ok, the MS subset data was not great, but the topline data is still very solid.
Is this a commercial issue?
And why does the PR suck so bad? I had to go elsewhere to find the full population data.
Either I am really missing something, or AVNR's PR writer is short the common.
[I have never heard of these guys before today, so I might just be way out to lunch here]
Re: "Maybe FDA will approve in a few months."
Nope, sorry.
The Zev issue was not to support efficacy/safety, it was to support some line item on the label.
This issue is efficacy.
"The FDA stated in the Complete Response letter that the submission did not demonstrate that FUSILEV is non-inferior to leucovorin; "
SPPI just got a CR for their Fusilev SNDA
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCNWNAB769120091009?rpc=44
Sounds a lot (by omission) like the FDA wants to see another trial.
Not huge news, but will quickly send the PPS down to the floor (around $5 is my guess).
-----------------------------------------------
* Says will request meeting with FDA
* Says FDA did not request changes to current indications
Oct 9 (Reuters) - Spectrum Pharmaceuticals (SPPI.O) said it received a complete response letter from U.S. health regulators regarding its supplementary marketing application for its drug, Fusilev, to treat advanced metastatic colorectal cancer.
Spectrum, which received marketing approval for its another cancer drug last month, said it plans to request a meeting with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to discuss options for approval of Fusilev.
Fusilev is currently approved by the FDA as a rescue after high dose of methotrexate therapy in patients with osteosarcoma, a type of bone cancer.
Fusilev is also indicated to diminish the toxicity and counteract the effects of impaired methotrexate elimination and of inadvertent overdosage of folic acid antagonist, a type of chemotherapy.
Spectrum said the FDA did not request any changes to the currently approved indications and package insert.
Shares of the company closed at $6.21 Thursday on Nasdaq. (Reporting by Anand Basu in Bangalore; Editing by Gopakumar Warrier)
More on reading comprehension
First, they did NOT state there was only 1 treatment related AE.
"and there was one study drug related severe adverse event of grade 3 vaginal mucositis."
That statement COULD mean what you think, or it could leave open other treatment related AEs that are not vaginal mucosites.
As to the mystery AE, yes it is not stated to be grade 5. But PRs usually use the lowest collection of grades possible. So there is real doubt.
Why not just put it in the PR?
Re: THLD PR AE parsing
I would suggest that the only self consistent explanation is that the death was expected.
Seriously, I assume the AE was indefinite with respect to being treatment related. Amongst THIS crowd, simply stating that in the PR would have been better.
But we are FAR outnumbered by the Y! crowd.
CTIC/HEB/CVM/TDLP all down big
Is the bio-crap scam game coming to an end?
P.S., Read the Y!MB for CVM on Adam F's latest if you want a laugh
Re: TDLP.OB P3 data
[EDIT: Didn't see DD beat me to this]
[EDIT2: They don't have enough cash to re-run the trial]
"BOOYAAAHH"
Huh?
"Analysis of the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population of the primary efficacy endpoint (which includes all study patients even if they failed to comply with the protocol and study requirements) favored Ketotransdel® compared to placebo but not to a degree that reached statistical significance. "
Re: TELK results
Read the PR a little closer. This is follow-up data where they took those who responded to the initial treatment and compared those who ELECTED to take Telcyta maintinace to those who did not.
Uhm, is it not obvious what the problem is here? People who are dieing of other causes will not elect to take more experimental drugs.
TELKs actions (several years ago) of withholding the earlier horrible P3 data in the hope the other P3s would hit was despicable.
Somebody needs to put together a list of management who does this crap. Following these losers from company to company would be a better indication of SCAMiness than DDs biotech value cross ref.
Re: Solvay accounting quiz
Without cheating (i.e., looking at Solvays's books) I would guess the answer is that a large chunk of the purchased assets will go on the books as acquired R&D.
Re: shorting an ETF vs long a short fund
Margin interest cost?
Unless you are taking a hit due to the mark-to-market cash sweep I do not see the higher cost.
Cash is not free, and you have to put it up for the long play also.
Re: MNTA and jmkobers views.
For well over a year now jmk has posted nothing other than defenses of RPRX (even after the July 1 liver tox disclosure nightmare), and negative comments on any of DDs stocks.
Given that RPRX was about the only stock he cared about, it is absurd to assume his interest in MNTA/IDIX/GTCB is anything other than personal against DD for his anti RPRX views/postings.
Wallstarb would note that "opinions" of anybody seriously in love with a stock are worthless because they are likely clouded. The same can be true in reverse.
BTW, I do assign a little bit of doubt to DDs estimates for just this reason. It is easy to get clouded by something you get to close too. That said, I would trust his factual statements and opinions more than anything coming from an analysts writings.
Trading bio-junk
I usually use other 4 letter words for this class of stock, but we all know what the story is.
Alas, between difficulty of borrowing along with risk aversion issues, it is hard for me to play the obvious shorts here.
Are there any funds that an individual (qualified, if it matters) can get in that plays bio-junk short?
An ETF would be ideal, but I have not seen one.
[I know there are many bio-tech funds and at least one index, but I mean one specific to the HEB crowd]
Re: Scam indicator
I refuse to cheat and look at the IHUB toolset. That said, my best answer would be :
PRs/pipeline.
The more PRs issued for a drug the more likely they are pumping.
Not as reliable as the gold standard though, subset analysis being claimed as a basis for an FDA decision. Just likely to late by then.
Re: CRXX and Exalgo
Your running with the lemmings if you play this stock.
CRXX had an interesting concept, but it wasn't panning out too well.
The merger with NeuroMed to get Exalgo was 100% a stock play on the FDA approval pop.
I am out now, and will not get back in at these numbers. I would try going short (if available) immediately after a favorable vote if such happens.
BTW, the FDA has a real problem with abuse of pain drugs. FWIW.
SPPI, dilution and valuation.
Considering that these deals continue to improve the balance sheet w/o a clear need for cash, there is only one possible conclusion to draw.
Razz IS Wallstarb!
On a serious note, the financing was a good move for the company. Yes, it does cause a PPS hit, but life is tough. I would guess that almost all virtual bios fail in a cash crises. Even though I disagree with wall's cash centric view, it certainly carries a lot of weight.
The fact that SPPI can run near breakeven cash and has a sound BS is far more reason to INVEST in the company than either of these 2 FDA decisions (though obviously EOquin is the core).
As to TRADING the stock, that is quite different.
How can you call CVM a scam?
"You have to consider that the 'bad' evolution of this virus is most likely to happen outside of this country," says Kersten. "That's where you're going to get re-assortment. We don't know what those death rates could be, but what you have from the current virus is high transmissibility in warm weather which has not been seen before in any other flu virus. If it picks up something nasty from another virus and that person gets on a plane, well then suddenly CEL-SCI could be the most important company in the world because there will be no one else who has done any work on this at all. Everyone would come to us."
LMAO
BTW, is this Kersten clown the guy who blew up at an ODAC meeting?
Re: SPPI trading
Time to get back in strongly long this stock.
Trading this beast is just too simple. It will hit $8.5 by early Oct. So you can scalp an easy profit and sell before and FDA letter.
And if the FDA say NAY, you get another whack at going long. And if Yeah, it's an easy short.
[Blade and all. Not dissing the investment value of SPPI at all here. Just saying the PPS short term is in the hands of idiots.]
Re: wallstarb "my stock is better than yours"
I could reply to your TSPT example with DNDN (well better than 300%, twice!), which you shunned with the statement (paraphrasing from memory) "does anybody believe their crap works?"
It's really pointless.
RE: MNTA and generic Lovenox pricing
If MNTA's product becomes the only approved generic I would tend to think they might price it a little higher than DDs estimate, intentionally leaving some market share on the table. The logic is that by allowing the branded drug to maintain a more respectable market share they would "force" Sanofi-Aventis to NOT launch an authorized generic.
Start with DD like numbers, that they could grab 80% share at 75% price point. This leaves the market at $1.5B/y for generic and $0.5B/y for branded. SA could launch an AG version and hope to gain .75B back (and only somewhat cannibalize the branded product). [I assume when there are just 2 generics they are intelligent enough to just split the share and not start a price war. I also assume there is some general floor below which the branded drug share doesn't drop].
Now what if the generic is priced a little higher so that they are only taking 60% of the market? Now the numbers are $1.1 (or so) for the generic and $1.0 for branded. At these numbers SA will not launch an AG as they will immediately cannibalize the highly profitable branded sales.
I obviously have no idea what the actual price sensitivity curves look like, but the concept seams valid. Take a little less of the pie, but avoid the competition from an AG.
Re: R&R and SPPI price target
To: Raz, CEO Spectrum Pharmaceuticals
From: R&R sales team
Thank you for doing business with us on your previous financings. Please feel free to get back with us for any of your future cash needs.
semi OT: SPPI, and FDA approval timelines
For everybody in cromagnum's universe, here is the FDA acting to keep a drug off the market.
Fusilev (levoleucorin, a single isotope verion of the long used folinic acid) was approved for osteosorcoma last year.
The NDA was submitted in 1990.
I had wasted a lot of time searching for the ODAC meeting on this, before realising it was before the dawn of electronic record keeping!
OT: Re: Nebido "18-gauge needle. Big ouch!"
That could be a benefit in some patients, the wannabe body builders with their phony prescriptions.
"Man that shit hurts, must be REAL good"
SPPI: blade, re Zevalin sales
I am not one to answer, but I would note 2 things:
1) We need to see the label first.
2) It is presently rarely used in relapsed settings, even though already approved. This is due to the belief (right or wrong) that Zev will/may make a patient intolerant of other chemoes, and thus should only be used as a last resort. It will take time to change this attitude (even though the new FDA indication will help).
On a different issue. Does anybody know how Xeloda(Capecitabine) is doing in colorectal cancer (as a 5FU replacement)?
blade, the alpha-rad+MAB guys vs. SPPI (Zev)
They radio-mab guys are like SGEN/IMGN and the conjugate guys. They attach a highly deadly payload to a MAD that targets something that (hopefully) is mainly present on the cancer cells.
The potential competiton you pointed to has technology that they claim can CREATE such dugs. They do not yet have one that is attached to Ritux. Even if they are correct, they have to use their platform to build the drug, then go through the entire process.
re: ARRY CC
When I hear companies talking of the "regional" breakdown of trial results, I see zebras.
An intelligent CC will be "162 in RA is dead, this is our forward going plans".
RE: SPPI, blade, Alpharadin
A) If they haven't yet linked to a CD-20 mab then they are 10+ yeas out.
B) SPPI <> Zevalin
Re: Swine Flue stocks flying
Looking at the chart of HEB, it is clear that even the swine themselves are flying!
Re: SPPI
Yeah, it does seam to be getting pricey. I bailed today even though I think the Zev odds with the FDA are quite good.
When playing the mo-mo greater fool game, best to exit early
P.S., the real danger in the days ahead is that the FDA gives ZEV a label that sucks wrt CHOP-R.
Re: SNY’s Otamixaban Is Unimpressive ..
"SEPIA-ACS1 study showed that otamixaban displayed clinically meaningful activity on the primary endpoint from the threshold dose of 0.070 mg/kg/h, the second tested dose, with a consistent antithrombotic effect up to the 5th highest tested dosage."
OK, am I brain dead or anal on questioning what this says?
Re: YMI: EGFr status and the nimo trials
Why do you feel the EGFr status of the trial population would be biased?
A) EGFr+ patient/doc believes it matters They can use marketed drug or enter trial.
B) EGFr- patient/doc believes it will not help. They will use neither marketed drug nor nimo.
C) patient doc doesn't care. Then status does not matter.
Under what condition do you feel the low expressing patient is more likely to be in the trial (other than random chance)?
Re: MEDX BMY tender handicapping
Does not the PPS action kind of suggest to you guys that the market (in particular, arbs) STRONGLY agree with Dew on this?
re: ACOR, the linked article reads like a hit peice
First, it expresses the walking deltas in ft/s so as to make the numbers seam small. Expressed as a percent the delta was 25% vs 5% improvement. Sounds quite clinically significant that way.
Second, to question the validity of a SPA covered trial's primary endpoint is way out there.
Third, the male/female imbalance seams real unlikely to outweigh the strong P value when the FDA does their evaluation. And this was only one of 2 trials.
No comment on the drug though.
Re: CTIC, forget that
Seams like it was a standard review. Do wonder why 2 out of 3 PRs on this failed to say such.
Bianco Boys still up to thier tricks.
So the FDA would appear to saying that Pixantrone is just another anthracycline, no magic in the cardiac safety profile that would allow it to be used in groups who have used up their quota of doxirubicine (or whatever).
Perhaps that drops the value of the drug just a tad?
CTIC: What's up with the Pix submission?
CTIC just announced the NDA was accepted, but no priority review dsignation yet. I thought these always came at the same time?
Per FDA, it's 60 days for both (and that time is now up). The 74 days is for "issues".
http://seattle.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2009/08/24/daily6.html?ana=yfcpc
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cell Therapeutics Inc. said its pixantrone drug for treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) has reached a “milestone” with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The Seattle biopharmaceutical company (NASDAQ: CTIC) said the FDA has accepted and has filed for review Cell Therapeutics’ New Drug Application (NDA) for pixantrone.
According to Cell Therapeutics, the FDA is required to set an action date for review of its application in 74 days. The company said it expects to receive the action date from the FDA and a final decision on review status on Sept. 4.
RE: IMGN, T-DM1 is is a new drug.
Herceptin being already approved (with all that data) does not help.
Though I have heard even Roach mention possibly filing after the present trial ends around EOY, I am a bit of a skeptic.
Still think this drug could well be "Herceptin-2", and >$4B sales, but maybe later than you think.
Re: MEDX tender offer
The only chance for getting insufficient shares in this situation would be if the shares were mainly retail.
I would assume that MANY retail shares would not tender. Many because they just have no clue, some like the way the price is going and don't understand, some dream.
Have 0 idea if this applies here.
Re: FLU-mist
I can not fathom what you mean with your numbers.
Per CDC:
"In one large study among children aged 15-85 months, the nasal-spray flu vaccine LAIV (FluMist®) reduced the chance of influenza illness by 92% compared with placebo. In a study among adults, the participants were not specifically tested for influenza. However, the study found 19% fewer severe febrile respiratory tract illnesses, 24% fewer respiratory tract illnesses with fever, 23-27% fewer days of illness, 13-28% fewer lost work days, 15-41% fewer health care provider visits, and 43-47% less use of antibiotics compared with placebo."
So what does the 4.5% number mean?
Does it mean in a typical year it's use has been shown to reduces the incident rate from 6.0% to 1.5%??
If so, you can not do the math the way you are attempting because even non-vaccinated are protected. It's the herd effect. You have to allow for those who are protected by others immunization.
It;s always population in this situation. And just saying "a 4.5% reduction" is meaningless. What % inoculation do you assume? What are the % affected w and w/o said use.
Re: ZGEN's CP against bovine thrombin
I guess that is why they paid for this, published in Patient Safety in Surgey (whatever that is) a few months back.
http://www.pssjournal.com/content/3/1/8
"Building an immune-mediated coagulopathy consensus: early recognition and evaluation to enhance post-surgical patient safety"
--------------------------------------------
Abstract
Topical hemostats, fibrin sealants, and surgical adhesives are regularly used in a variety of surgical procedures involving multiple disciplines. Generally, these adjuncts to surgical hemostasis are valuable means for improving wound visualization, reducing blood loss or adding tissue adherence; however, some of these agents are responsible for under-recognized adverse reactions and outcomes. Bovine thrombin, for example, is a topical hemostat with a long history of clinical application that is widely used alone or in combination with other hemostatic agents. Hematologists and coagulation experts are aware that these agents can lead to development of an immune-mediated coagulopathy (IMC). A paucity of data on the incidence of IMC contributes to under-recognition and leaves many surgeons unaware that this clinical entity, originating from normal immune responses to foreign antigen exposure, requires enhanced post-operative vigilance and judicious clinical judgment to achieve best outcomes.
Postoperative bleeding may result from issues such as loosened ties or clips or the occurrence of a coagulopathy due to hemodilution, vitamin K deficiency, disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) or post-transfusion, post-shock coagulopathic states. Other causes, such as liver disease, may be ruled out by a careful patient history and common pre-operative liver function tests. Less common are coagulopathies secondary to pathologic immune responses. Such coagulopathies include those that may result from inherent patient problems such as patients with an immune dysfunction related to systemic lupus erythrematosus (SLE) or lymphoma that can invoke antibodies against native coagulation factors. Medical interventions may also provoke antibody formation in the form of self-directed anti-coagulation factor antibodies, that result in problematic bleeding; it is these iatrogenic post-operative coagulopathies, including those associated with bovine thrombin exposure and its clinical context, that this panel was convened to address.
The RETACC panel's goal was to attain a logical consensus by reviewing the scientific evidence surrounding IMC and to make recommendations for the clinical recognition, diagnosis and evaluation, and clinical management of these complications. In light of the under-recognition and under-reporting of IMC, and given the associated morbidity, utilization of health care resources, and potential economic impact to hospitals, the panel engaged in a detailed review of peer-reviewed reports of bovine thrombin associated IMC. From that clinical knowledge base, recommendations were developed to guide clinicians in the recognition, diagnosis, and management of this challenging condition.
Findings
Recognizing Immune-Mediated Coagulopathy Associated with Bovine Thrombin
IMC is thought to be a relatively uncommon, under-recognized, and iatrogenic medical condition that can result from exposure to non-human coagulation proteins, such as porcine FVIII and bovine thrombin [1,2]. Beginning in 1989, coincident with the rising utilization of bovine thrombin preparations for topical surgical hemostasis, a number of case reports of post-surgical bovine thrombin associated IMC began to appear in the literature [3-35]. IMC occurring unexpectedly in post-surgical patients who were either exposed or re-exposed to bovine thrombin preparations have continued to be reported in nearly all surgical specialties, though cardiac, pediatric and orthopedic/neurosurgical case reports comprise the majority (Table 1). Interestingly, in the panel's literature review of 64 cases with known or presumed surgical exposure to topical bovine thrombin, there is a near equal representation of bleeding versus non-bleeding case presentations. Given that the majority of data on this condition is from case reports, the true incidence is unknown, but numerous reports have appeared in the literature since the year 2000 [3,6,7,11,17-19,22,24,25,27-29,31,36]. The true incidence of IMC associated with bovine thrombin remains unknown due to the lack of a clinical trial designed to answer that question. The result is a mixture of low awareness and confusion in the clinical community about the delayed onset of antibody formation and the challenges posed by masking due to coexistent coagulopathies (e.g., consumptive, dilutive, drug-induced, etc.).
Table 1. Reports of bleeding and non-bleeding IMC
This panel's extensive review found that IMC always has a delayed onset following surgical procedures where bovine thrombin was used; none of the 61 cases reviewed (where time from exposure to clinical presentation was recorded), presented with symptoms or laboratory abnormalities earlier than 5 days following exposure (Table 2). The mean time to clinical presentation or laboratory abnormality (whichever was earlier) was 32 days, highlighting the potential for significant delay in onset and the potential for out of hospital risk. The most common time to presentation reported was 8 days (mode), while the median time to presentation was 11 days. Earlier clinical presentation in the 7 to 14 day time frame has most often been attributed to secondary exposure, where a second surgical exposure to a bovine thrombin preparation acts as a type of immunologic booster for antibody development [37,38]. Typically, primary exposure involves a more delayed clinical presentation due to the need for de novo maturation of the plasma B-cell antibody response. This obligatory time frame, dictated by the cellular and humoral mechanisms necessary for antibody formation, can delay diagnosis or even conceal the occurrence of these events from the surgeons employing these agents. The panel subscribe that with a proper index of suspicion, the resulting delays in recognition and treatment are preventable as are the increased morbidity, mortality, increased length of hospitalization and increased utilization of blood products that accompany this acquired disorder.
Table 2. Time from bovine thrombin exposure to clinical presentation of IMC
The evidence indicates that bovine thrombin related IMC results from antibodies that develop in response to bovine thrombin exposure and its associated proteins such as bovine factor V [18,31,39-41]. Bovine thrombin preparations have been reported to have in addition to bovine thrombin, bovine factors V, IX, and X as well as non-specific, immunoreactive proteins presumed to be protein fragments [42]. These antibodies may cross-react with human coagulation proteins, significantly interfering with the normal clotting cascade. Clinical sequelae range from individuals with abnormal prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and thrombin time (TT) who are asymptomatic and at risk for bleeding [18,25,28,29,31] to anaphylaxis [36], hemorrhage [19,27], or other critical adverse events [17,19,27,43,44]. Despite prolonged efforts to improve manufacturing methods and remove contaminating proteins [18,38,40,41,45], there is no clinical evidence that bovine thrombin antigenicity has been reduced.
Most severe bleeding episodes occur following repeated exposure to bovine thrombin [34,46] and although history and documented use are often the best indication of previous bovine thrombin exposure, charts or pharmacy records can be incomplete. Accordingly, due to the widespread use of bovine thrombin in many different types of surgery, prior exposure can be difficult to determine in some patients. Even if documentation of prior exposure is available, it is impossible to predict whether antibodies will form or clinical sequelae will result. However, when presented with a patient with difficult to explain coagulopathy, a history that includes previous bovine thrombin exposure or procedures where it was likely used should raise suspicion of the potential for IMC as an etiology.
Re: AEZS's failed P3
"The failed p3 trial had both higher placebo response and lower active response. And yes I couldn't hear on the call anything that could explain this."
Perhapse this:
"Abstract: In this meta-study we investigated reasons why US Phase 3 drug trials appear to fail at a higher than expected rate"
"Conclusion: Often the placebo arm, under pressure of being in the spotlight, 'bows up' and over-performs versus historical norms"
Re: NVAX and H1N1
What's the point?
The VLP vaccine cant possibly get through trials in time for this coming flu season, and I assume H1N1 is generational?
OK, maybe they are proving a science point (fine if that is the case), but this sounds more like a PR ploy. Or at least the PR is a PR ploy (hopefully this is not as dumb as it sounds).