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.
Only he would know what his strategy was.
Perhaps he was just betting on a quick pop and exit on the SUCCEED trial results (which it looks like that's what he did).
In and out with a quick gain.... that's fine.
Maybe he's back in now. I doubt it as Hayman Capital isn't known to be a biotech oriented fund.
Bass sold out prior to 3/31/2011...600,000 shares, full position.
i would expect that. however, Paseri is a born loser so you always need to factor him into it. He hasnt succeeded at anything in a long time, if ever.
I'm not talking about you specifically, I'm talking about TA in general.
I barely use fundamentals when doing a pure trade. And, 75% of my work is based on TA...the rest is based on fundamentals and management (garbage mgmt or good).
I just think its funny listening to people talk about Elliot Wave etc and all these other ridiculous TA tools and when it doesn't work out for them, they just draw in another wave until it gets to what they want it to be, lol.
Would love to see where this pig ARIA would be trading at right now in a good market.
That's the worst thing about technical analysis. When it doesn't work out in your favor, just draw another line until it works for you...
I don't know anything about AIS. The chart looks like its shaping out nicely, however.
I like your LinkedIn idea, FWIW. I can't see why that company is trading at that valuation.
So if I follow your logic, because there is a speaker on Sarcoma, and CML, we should also have a big news announcements on Ridaforolimus and Ponatinib as well, correct?
IMO, January is a likely time for them to announce another candidate. To be honest, I have no idea why people are excited or even hot and bothered about another drug candidate. They have three major drugs in development right now, is that not enough to be excited about? Further, do you guys really expect a new drug candidate to be a major market moving event, or are people just bored to death talking about Ponatinb and Ridaforolimus? Relax, because in a few months you will have all you want to talk about 113.
so you don't anticipate Harvey announcing he is increasing the poison-pill to $130.00 per share?
TIA
I'm not saying there WON'T be any news but I wouldn't be holding my breath for it.
Lots of companies hold analyst days; especially, the ones where there is major institutional sponsorship.
lol yup they're still pumping their mouse models.
I don't even know what the bet was, if that's the case.
Thanks.
I couldn't agree more about the management. Rombotis is a moron.
Sapacitabine looks like a decent drug, no? Oral drug with good evidence of efficacy in elderly AML. For a market cap of $60 million, the company looks fairly cheap here....I think two things are holding it back: (1) Cash levels, (2) Spiro Rombotis is garbage.
Anyone here currently own CYCC?
Would like an opinion.
Thanks
Dalotuzumab failure
One more reason why Merck needs an MTOR to combine with their IGFR1:
IMO, these moves on strength in incredibly weak, crap markets like we've been seeing are reminiscent of an investment bank (or two) driving a stock higher prior to a secondary issuance.
I've seen it many times. See if it pans out..it would probably be the most successful financings from The Harv, ever.
At what point do you think ARIA does another financing?
It's getting to the levels where I think the CEO will pull the trigger.
They could issue 10 million shares up around these levels and raise $100 million which would be well than more enough to fund both their '113 trials and larger trials in other indications with Ponatinib.
What lung cancer "presentation"?
So Sprycel and Tasigna are going to increase the rate of T315i patients...according to this briefing.
Thanks for posting this, btw.
No..LOL.
No deal.
ARIA short interest increases from 5/13 to 5/31
by 800,000
Did they think the news was going to be highly negative at ASCO? Is it some macro-dbag hoping the market will crumble?
Curis Presentation June 2011
New slides on CUDC-101
http://www.wsw.com/webcast/jeff60/cris/
Showing efficacy in liver cancer patient who has been through 2 SOC treatments.
It's one bet I'm happy to lose.
I've always said that Ridaforolimus will show its most success in combination studies.
Firstly, Merck needs Ridaforolimus badly because I think that Dalotuzamab isn't a widely promising drug without an MTOR in many indications. Further MK-2206 is likely to be more effective with an MTOR as well.
I don't see a big future with single agent Ridaforolimus.
Whatever....I'm more focused on 113 and Ponatinib now.
Still interested to see results in the rida combos though...I want to see scans.
10 more cents and I'll be here posting for the next month...LOL.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=21359
In Vivo Combination Study Ridaforolimus
ASCO Poster
http://sherifmorgan.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Morgan-and-Cranmer-ASCO-Poster-Final.pdf
In Vivo Combination Study Ridaforolimus
ASCO Poster
http://sherifmorgan.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Morgan-and-Cranmer-ASCO-Poster-Final.pdf
No its a phase 2 trial in progress.
no i did not subscribe, i was hoping someone here had a subscription and could post the poster (and the poster on GDC449).
subscription required:
http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/MultiMedia/Virtual+Meeting?&vmview=vm_session_presentations_view&confID=102&sessionID=4169
Info on Rida + 646
Trials in Progress Poster Session
Lots of data in trials in progress.
http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/MultiMedia/Virtual+Meeting?&vmview=vm_session_presentations_view&confID=102&sessionID=4169
GDC-0449 and FOLFOX in gastro
Ridaforolimus + MK-646 in breast cancer
Medco Health Solutions has added BCR-ABL testing to its personalized medicine portfolio, marking the tenth such offering under its DNA Direct clinical testing program.
The company said this week that it will offer MolecularMD's qRT-PCR BCR-ABL test to patients diagnosed with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in order to monitor their response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as imatinib (Novartis's Gleevec), dasatinib (Bristol-Myers Squibb's Sprycel) and nilotinib (Novartis's Tasigna).
More than 95 percent of CML patients harbor a mutation in BCR-ABL, which is also called the Philadelphia chromosome. The protein produced by the BCR-ABL gene promotes cancer cell proliferation, and TKIs such as Gleevec, Sprycel, and Tasigna inhibit the activity of the mutated BCR-ABL protein to suppress the cancer's growth.
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends BCR-ABL testing in CML patients at diagnosis to establish a baseline BCR-ABL level, every three months while a patient appears to be responding to treatment, and every three to six months once a patient achieves complete cytogenetic response.
Separately, Ariad Pharmaceuticals is using MolecularMD's ABL kinase domain sequencing technology to pick out best responders to its investigational BCR-ABL inhibitor ponatinib in the so called Ponatinib Ph+ ALL and CML Evaluation, or PACE trial. Using the test, researchers will give the drug to patients with mutant forms for BCR-ABL who are intolerant or resistant to Sprycel or Tasagnia or developed T315I mutations after receiving any tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, including Gleevec (PGx Reporter 03/30/2011).
Jane Barlow, vice president of clinical innovation at Medco, said in a statement that using BCR-ABL testing regularly to determine if a patient is exhibiting the appropriate response to the drug "can help ensure better clinical outcomes for the patient and reduce overall healthcare costs for the health plan."
Barlow told PGx Reporter that even though NCCN recommends quarterly BCR-ABL testing for patients taking TKIs, many physicians do not comply with these guidelines.
Medco researchers recently examined medical claims records of 359 CML patients who were treated with Gleevec and found that only 60 percent had evidence of at least one test performed at any time over the last one and a half years, while only 14 percent had BCR-ABL testing recorded on a consecutive quarterly basis.
"These findings are important in that regular BCR-ABL monitoring is needed to avoid delay in key decisions about CML treatment, as well as to help insure the best treatment outcome possible," Barlow said.
The company decided to launch the BCR-ABL testing program in order to address this "gap in testing to evidence-based guidelines," and also because "strict adherence to these medications is critical to the success of the treatment and thus can be life saving," Barlow said.
Medco will offer MolecularMD's BCR-ABL test as part of its DNA Direct clinical testing services. Once the pharmacy benefits manager identifies a patient in need of the test and secures a physician order, it will send a specimen collection kit directly to the patient. The patient's physician or phlebotomist then collects a blood sample and sends it to MolecularMD's CLIA-approved and CAP-accredited facility, where the test is performed.
MolecularMD will provide a quantitative report that will reference the International Scale, an internationally accepted standard for monitoring BCR-ABL transcript levels in CML patients. The report will also include information on the patient's adherence to therapy, which will assist the physician in "addressing any adherence barrier that might contribute to a loss of response to therapy or drug resistance," Medco said.
Barlow told PGx Reporter that the company is partnering with MolecularMD for BCR-ABL testing because of the company's "experience in this field," and the fact that the firm has "been at the forefront of research related to these medications and BCR-ABL testing."
MolecularMD founder Brian Druker, director of the Knight Cancer Institute at Oregon Health & Science University, led the clinical trials of Gleevec for CML.
Barlow also cited the fact that MolecularMD tests to the International Standard, "which allows for a more accurate comparison of test results from the same and different labs that also use the international standard."
Other companies offer laboratory-developed BCR-ABL tests, including Roche, Qiagen, and the Laboratory Corporation of America. Last year, Gleevec manufacturer Novartis began collaborating with Cepheid to develop a PCR-based BCR-ABL test on Cepheid's GeneXpert system that will also be compliant with the International Scale. The partners said they plan to seek clearance for the test through the US Food and Drug Administration, which would make it the first BCR-ABL test to gain FDA approval (PGx Reporter 10/13/10).
— Turna Ray contributed reporting to this article.
Why not? He needs his bonus when UBS does the next financing.
bootechresearchers other statement is that it will only be used for t315i patients which is utterly, and patently false.