The article I posted was the BusinessWeek one (by Catherine Arnst), not the Reuters (by Michael Kahn), and I thought it was quite balanced.
As for the bothering phrase from the Reuters report, here's the exact quote:
"The researchers did not compare the drug directly to Tysabri but based on existing data said they believe alemtuzumab is a more effective and safer treatment."
I suppose the NEJM authors compared data from Tysabri's trials (such as SENTINEL) to Campath's and stated the above. We know the limitation of comparing different trials but I think we can agree that Campath appears to be a potent agent for MS and the issue is side effects. I think that if there's even one ITP related death in Campath's Phase III trials, it would end its chance to compete in the MS market.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
