Bio is correct in this. THey have a proven history of cutting corners. CHeck out the last non approval letter Genta got from the FDA. the way in which they presented their data was not to the liking of the FDA. They made in my estimation a critical error at that time. Not only did it tarnish the company image but it wasted time and money. there is no doubt that they are on to something however again, they need but do not have the money to have more qulalified people helping them with this.
My call is 85% Shering Plough and 15% Pfizer if anyone will partner. Just a guess but something about that last release seemed more telling...just IMO
SURFER--I dont know what they meant, but they sounded more enthused than what this caused. Hoping they meant something better but honestly who knows at this point. I am actually mentally and emotionally exhausted by genta..give us something. GLTA IMO
I really dont care what you believe. When VP's and Medical Directors of Pharma companies who focus in oncology tell me things I listen. I think they understand how things are done and if you think that Genta didnt everything by the book and the people at Genta are so smart why is their stock at a penny and they have no money. Why has the FDA asked them over and over to confirm the original findings?? Read this article http://www.bio-itworld.com/archive/061704/genasense
This is when Genta actually had money. I'm sure you will see some lines in the article such as
critical weaknesses in how the Phase III trial data were analyzed
Pivotal data from the Phase III trial “could be falsely positive,” the reviewers wrote.
but there are important issues of statistical integrity
When you have a clue to what your talking about get back to me.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
