Replies to post #87712 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

BioMS addendum: Why is BioMS not simply merging with Spectral instead of taking a controlling stake in Spectral while maintaining BioMs as a shell company? There’s probably a legal reason, but I can’t figure out what it is.

[mcbio]

Re: BioMS (Medwell Capital)/Spectral Diagnostics

BioMS implements Plan B: buying a controlling stake in another Canadian company called Spectral Diagnostics:

finance.yahoo.com/news/BioMS-Medical-provides-prnews-2173288487.html?x=0&.v=13

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Spectral-diagnostics-Raises-cnw-3942098078.html?x=0&.v=2

BioMS dropped its drug for SPMS, dirucotide, in July 2009 (#msg-39934109), causing the stock to tank by almost 90%. For some reason, many investors previously believed that a drug with no efficacy in RRMS might work in SPMS, illogical as this may be.

After today’s financing, BioMS will hold approximately a 60% equity stake in Spectral on a fully-diluted basis. Spectral’s claim to fame is a device to “purify” the blood of people with sepsis.

I missed this prior post from you way back when and just came across this story the other day due to a post on SI (http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=26879597 ). BioMS is now known as Medwell Capital. What's your take on Spectral's drug to treat sepsis? They are apparently trying to develop a drug called Toraymyxin that's used in Japan and Italy for sepsis, for which Spectral now apparently has U.S. rights, in combination with their own endotoxin diagnostic. Peter, please weigh in here if you have anything else to add as I see you responded over on SI (http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readreplies.aspx?subjectid=26145&nonstock=False&msgid=26879597 ).

Spectral has a PowerPoint presentation from a recent Rodman conference on its Web site (http://spectraldx.com/press.htm ). From what I gather, and I'm by no means a sepsis expert, I think Spectral is trying to intervene early in the sepsis cascade where endotoxins can presumably be identified with their diagnostic and treated with the drug to actually remove them. I assume in theory this is supposed to potentially halt the sepsis cascade. I guess I have two main questions: How is this approach different from all of the original sepsis failures (e.g. Synergen, Xoma, etc.)? Weren't those approaches focused on neutralizing endotoxins as well? Also, a recent article posted by flo (#msg-55163258 ) seems to imply that it's not the bacteria/endotoxins that are the issue, but it's more the interaction between them and the immune system wherein once that reaction is started it doesn't matter if you remove the bacteria/endotoxins because it's too late. That article suggests a new potential treatment targeting heme to neutralize these toxic reactions.

So, is Spectral's approach pretty much dead in the water? Or is it possible that Spectral's approach could be differentiated enough from the prior failures and still intervening in the sepsis cascade at an early enough stage (i.e. before endotoxins have a chance to react negatively with the immune system) to where the approach could be beneficial against early-stage sepsis?