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.
that same bunch of apples who believe that I am more afraid to lose than to see CTIX win!
Brilacidin for stroke affected tissue...anybody?
I read this article and couldn't help to think that Brilacidin may also be used for the treatment of stroke afflicted tissue and atherosclerotic lesions. What do you think?
'Scientists at Yale and the University of Rhode Island have developed a peptide that can specifically and directly deliver molecules to the inside of cells like a nanosyringe, creating a new tool for tissue imaging.
Their 'cargo carrier' peptide, named pHLIP, accumulates in the membranes of cells in acidic environments and spontaneously transfers attached molecules across the membrane.'
He designed the study & he is a specialist in the field....not only, we have with brilacidin a two fold punch to B_UP trial: The high percentage of antimicrobial peptides and immunomodulatory activity...two things that you want to see in a corticosteroid to treat colitis and crohns disease - i am sure the good dr. is very well versed in such.......this says that it will be successful!...tough to bet against dont ya think?
SHORTS LESS INCLINED TO PLAY NOW?
a couple of things....shorts would never go in that heavy this close to news on multiple fronts - too much risk, just didn't want to play today...they feel they have better odds at 1230 pm on monday if there is no news then and paint the tape based on volume....second thing is 8k came out so with the gastro md joing advisory board....can you say multiple uses for B!!!!!.... also with the odds of the macd indicating a very bullish trend, shorts feel less inclined to play with CTIX... just my 2 cents
A FRIEND ONCE SAID THERE ARE CERTAIN EVILS THAT YOU JUST CANT PROVE! THIS IS WHY THIS CASE IS SO IMPORTANT THAT THE JUDGE NAILS THESE @!%*!
its exactly like the old adage...that's what this case has always been about!!!! SHAME!
it seems to me that a lot has gone into 'killing' this stock, imho - I MEAN A LOT - we are talking several months of time and effort:
bogus articles degrading the company
selling into rallies with enormous volume on NO news
lawsuit
short selling
spreading malicious rumors day in and day out about delays
gaining a large position at a low price to manip share price
I have never seen the trading activity like this small stock EVER. I mean if you had the opportunity to kill this stock, why wouldn't you try, if you were of that ilk:
low volume
opportunity to short a low priced stock when any neg. news,
emerging biotech that has a lot of trials coming due -
SO PLAY THE ODDS THAT ONE TRIAL MAY FAIL
emerging biotech so why not try and kill it - less competit
The moral question is if this is happening why would one do such. Answer: the heart is desperately wicked, who could know such?
sure he does....
1. Brilacidin OM...early results
2. Kevetrin Pancreatic...unmet need
3. Kevetrin Ovarian...unmet need
4. Dismissal of lawsuit....damages, sanctions
5. Brilacidin UP
6. Purisol....licenses
7. Up-listing, which you mentioned
8. Brilacidin as an anti-biofilm, anti-inflammatory
9. Partner for any of these drugs
10. Research being done for Kevetrin in world class facility in MN
11. Paper due by Dana Farber for Kevetrin
12. Kevetrin's effectiveness alone on solid tumors
hahahaha...now you did it...trash talking always gets better when they try to swing the tiny wick...
Finally Ashcroft tells it like it is...
Finally, Ashcroft is showing that the plaintiff is declaring to the court in which there is a distinction between malfeasance and a THEORETICAL ARGUMENT, which this case has morphed into - a theoretical escapade causing damage to the shareholders, damage to clinical research, and damage to the system of law as we know such! This case didn't even start out as a theoretical argument as to how cellceutix's clinical research was effective or not, but it is quickly turning into such (not to mention they shouldn't even be allowed to be making such an argument before the court): first it was the office was empty and it was a shell game (based on a bogus article); then it was scienter and how they said they that they were put on notice of such to prove such (which they never did); then, they said the company didn't have any experience in running clinical trials...you begin to see how they have pitifully and shamefully are wasting the court's time, wasting the clinician's time, and the patient's time....no wonder why people have lost faith in the legal system!!
imo this case borders on a piece of filth and a piece of crap at best....it doesn't take faith to know when something smells as bad as this does! btw it has a hole in it that you could drive a fleet of mack trucks through
if they do all they will say is, 'they have to consider such a plea as 'all statements as true' - what malarkey and a bunch of jumbo mumbo jumbo!
This one statement says it all!!!!
in the process, plaintiff essentially creates
fast moving targets for Defendants (which he hopes Defendants
can never hit)
I hope the judge drops this like a hot potato and then yells at the 'cook' for serving such crap!
of course, and do you like how I have the lawsuit listed twice! ;)
DON'T WATCH PAINT DRY TOO LONG ON CTIX
1)MID TRIAL B-OM DUE SOON
2)LAWSUIT DISMISSAL
3)SPA APPLICATION ACCEPTED SOON BY FDA FOR OVARIAN CANCER
4)PURISOL RESULTS
5)LAWSUIT DISMISSED
6)KEVETRIN FOR PANCREATIC CANCER
7)KEVETRIN REVIEW BY DANA FARBER
8)BIO-FILM USE FOR KEVETRIN
9)PRESTIGIOUS RESEARCH FACILITY IN MN STUDYING KEVETRIN
10)??????PARTNER, LICENSING DEALS
TWITTER'S ABUZZ ABOUT CTIX...MANY LIKES THUS FAR! GO CTIX!
LETS START TWEETING!!! TELL ALL! GO CTIX!!
BE PATIENT ON MONDAY
WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE 'SELLERS' DO FIRST, MAKE YOUR TRADES COUNT
Although there will be 'those individuals' who will sell their cheap shares into a future rally...today was not the case as seen with the price movement at 130 - 230...a lot of short covering and unwinding, which by the way was well absorbed...imho...much of the price action today came from the response of leo in that the last patient was seen...which was way early than expected and not to mention a little bit cheeky as positive news just may have leaked! imo
go ctix, painting the tape at 4 or near close should be interesting
go figure selling into a rally again....35k block traded....
just sayin, perhaps there 'trollin' this company because they are fond of this bridge.
we CAN call them insiders if you want. we can even say they know the prognosis (sarcasm), but this is happening. and it is a shame. I am long this company. I think kevetrin is going to show great results in the ph 2 combination therapy and i believe Brilacidin is a slam dunk in all areas
who said there are fake shares - someone is gaining a position at low levels and selling them whenever they want to keep the price low....pathetic!
maybe not, but someone sure is dumping a bunch of shares into any rally....simple simpleton
Seems to be a re-hash of the same diatribe from the original complaint....hoping that the judge sees that there is nothing new here and what is new should be left to the clinical studies of those doing the research! Pitiful.
The results will almost come within several days or perhaps a few weeks that the judge decides whether to dismiss...it's getting hot in here, can you take it ya'll! Longs have seen the worst, bogus articles, short attacks, etc....can't say that for the short side!
Recent court filing - what does this mean? CAKaren?
KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge:
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the letter motions at docket
entries 26 and 27, which motions were previously resolved by the Court.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 1, 2016
New York, New York
26 and 27 are the dockets for requesting an extension from the #$%$...They were to busy suing some other company that they know nothing about...
so, what's your take on yesterday's news?
if this is dismissed, they have definitely laid the ground work for bringing a frivolous lawsuit to trial....
0 due diligence by rosen
referencing points directly from Mako article as a basis of lawsuit
asking judge to dismiss with prejudice
references that ctix stock dropped after Mako article
language that they have met with FBI and law enforcement
this is all language that they will have to back up and will i believe
plus,
ashcroft referencing a rule of law as it relates to amending a lawsuit, when it was in fact created on false information
judge hinting that if there was any corruptible acts to be found on behalf of bringing a frivolous lawsuit that it would come out in the wash!
when its dismissed, ashcroft isn't done with them....
my 2 cents.....id say the toast is looking black vs. brown
one thing that I got from the judges tone, if there's a weasel in there, she wants to find it, but i highly doubt she will bring this turd,, excuse me weasel to trial.
Here's what we probably have by May:
Purisol results...
SPA application acceptance by FDA for Brilacidin for ABBSSI...
Judges possible dismissal of lawsuit....
Brilacidin mucositis....
THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE WAITED FOR. AS APOLLO CREED SAID, 'THIS IS IT MAN!!!'
no, never! esp since we had this selling into the news for weeks now!
if these 8 achieve a p21 increase that brings the response rate to >83%....my guess is they had just starting dosing when the data came out
What people are forgetting is that for 8 of the patients P53 data wasn't yet available....if these 8 show(s) an increase in P53 as well, you are looking at >85% response rate.....with multiple doses per week you are looking at a successful drug for stage 4 cancer treatments!!!!
karinca,
I wonder if anyone has shared this letter that I wrote to Ashcroft concerning scienter:
I think that it could be argued in the case against Cellceutix depends heavily on the litigation reform Act of 1995, whereby it is imperative that they state why the statements that were made were misleading......if the statement fails, the case must be dismissed before they can do discovery....by amending the complaint they failed to do the required due diligence in the first complaint and therefore the case must formally be dismissed. It does raise a strong legal question if they even should have been allowed to amend the complaint in the first place.
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 established a uniform scienter pleading standard which was intended to preclude frivolous securities litigation. Under the Reform Act, a complaint alleging securities fraud must "specify each statement alleged to have been misleading, the reason or reasons why the statement is misleading, and if an allegation regarding the statement or omission is made on information and belief, the complaint shall state with particularity all the facts on which the belief is formed. In order to sufficiently allege scienter, the complaint must now state with particularity facts giving rise to a strong inference that the defendant acted with the requisite state of mind. If the complaint fails to satisfy these pleading requirements, the lawsuit must be dismissed at the early pleading stage of the litigation before plaintiffs can conduct discovery.
don't think its that I think that everyone is being super careful as law enforcement is probably looking into the short selling of this stock and the manipulation imo
karen, interesting the high as compared to the ibb is around the mako article and rosen announcing lawsuit
that's nothing compared to what we've been through....the nay-sayers posting their diatribe at every ctix move ad infinitum, the naked shorting, Mako, Rosen, selling shares into strong data, treating stage 4 diseases, tweaking of trials, i can take it much much more....
BK, possibility of parenteral injection of kevetrin
Mutations of the p53 tumor suppressor gene are the most frequently observed genetic lesion in human cancer. Previously, we found that multiple intravenous injections of a liposome:p53 complex inhibited the growth of a malignant human breast cancer cell line that was implanted into nude mice. In the present study, we evaluated the toxicity of the liposome:p53 complex and the mechanism of this in vivo treatment in reducing tumor growth. Intravenously delivered liposome:p53 complex at dosages sufficient to inhibit human breast cancer in nude mice showed no evidence of toxicity. Clinical chemistries, complete blood counts, and histopathologic examination of various organs from the p53-treated groups did not demonstrate any difference from the control groups. To elucidate the mechanism by which the liposome:p53 complex inhibits cancer, the transfection efficiency of a liposome:chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) complex into the tumor was determined. Interestingly, less than 5% of the tumor was transfected with a liposome:CAT complex. A mechanism that could account for p53 reduction of tumor size and a low transfection efficiency is inhibition of angiogenesis. After one treatment, we found that the liposome:p53 complex reduced the number of blood vessels in the p53-treated group by approximately 60% compared to the control group (p < 0.001). The close correlation between the antitumor effect of p53 and the reduction of blood vessel density in the tumor suggests that p53 effects are mediated, at least in part, by an antiangiogenesis mechanism.
The mechanism by which p53 inhibits human breast cancer implanted into nude mice is unclear. Our study suggests that the liposome:p53 complex reduces tumor growth through a bystander effect. The bystander effect may be due to inhibition of angiogenesis. At the dosages used in this in vivo study to repress tumors that varied in their p53 status, there was no evidence of toxicity.