PGS or anyone else interested in TELK - I'd be curious to hear your feedback on the following post from a friend of mine...
1) ASSIST-1: survival endpt, 3rd line ovarian, telcyta mono vs
doxil...phase II data is 15% response rate in tel and 12%
historically for doxil...my bet - under 30% chance of success
2) ASSIST-2: survival endpt, 3rd line NSCLC, telycta vs
Iressa...completely meaningless regardless of outcome because Iressa
has no survival benefit...so at best is tel is another tarceva, which
is not seeing much growth in sales in 2nd/3rd nsclc markets..
3) ASSIST-3: response rate endpt, 2nd line ovarian, telcyta plus
carbo vs doxil alone...highest chance of success, but again
meaningless in the approval path because if ASSIST-1 is a bomb, odds
for the agency to let a RR surrogate endpt to go thru in light of a
negative survival study (with the same drug and similar indication)
are poor...also, one has to question why in 3rd line ovarian, the
response rate of tel mono vs doxil mono is not that big of a
difference..(phase II tel plus carbo RR was 56%...recall the doxil RR
is about 12%)...so could the real benefactor is carbo instead of tel..
telk also running trials of tel plus cisplatin in frontline
nsclc...this is another trial that ignores the landscape of nsclc
options...cisplatin now used in combo with gemzar as a
standard...along with paclitaxel and carboplatin...these two are the
gold standards...few folks use cisplatin alone these days...throw in
the avastin monkey wrench in frontline setting..people will use
pac/carbo/avas before anything else...i just dont see telcyta will
work in the frontline space with the trials onging..
this is why i label telk a DUD...LOL...900 Million mkt cap for a
refractory ovarian indication at best is a very very very very very
expensive proposition./.
jmho..au
a:=[]
AI
