Re: Additional color
>>Having worked in both the pharmaceutical industry (training sales reps on the medical aspects of drugs) and on the "front lines" in pharmacy, I understand how these companies market. If something is good, the hyperbole is unbounded. If the information is bad to marginal, the statements are positive, but subdued.<<
I could not agree more.
A case in point was GENR’s mid-2004 PR announcing the phase-2 results in non-small-cell lung cancer, which said how management and the clinicians were “encouraged” by the data. Yes, they were so greatly encouraged that they have done absolutely nothing to plan a follow-on study.
We saw essentially the same thing with Lomucin in cystic fibrosis. In October 2003, GENR announced in a PR that the data were encouraging, and cheerleaders such as ‘ridgerunner’ on the Yahoo board pumped the results hard. Yet a year and a half has now elapsed since the CF trial was completed and there has been no follow-up.
>>Also, claiming profit is a good thing<<
Like you, I made money on GENR (a lot of it --my largest-ever gain in the market) and I do not wish to give it back. Those still holding GENR could yet strike it big, but I do not like the odds.
In particular, I question whether the company will ever get the critical “209” trial fully enrolled now that Macugen is on the market. I also wonder about possible issues in the manufacturing of Squalamine that might derail the AMD program. That GENR steadfastly refuses to disclose details of the manufacturing does not help to allay such concerns.
Last but not least, a systemic approach to anti-angiogenic AMD treatment appears far less attractive today than it once appeared to be. Every other company pursuing the large AMD market has opted for a locally-administered treatment.
Putting this all together to the degree that can be done with the limited data that investors have access to, I now give Squalamine at most one chance in three of reaching the market before 2010.