Replies to post #395953 on Zeev's Turnips Patch-No Politics (ZEEV)

[osprey]

"Macugen is a pegylated anti-VEGF aptamer, which binds to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)." Straight from an eyet PR, more of which is copied below. I didn't make one single comment on whether lucentis or macugen are better or not. I just pointed out that your yahoo poster is babbling incoherently and completely useless. FWIW, lucentis is an antibody that also binds to VEGF. VEGF=VEGF.

Macugen is indicated in the United States and Brazil for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration and in Canada for subfoveal choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to neovascular AMD. Macugen is a pegylated anti-VEGF aptamer, which binds to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). VEGF is a protein that plays a critical role in angiogenesis (the formation of new blood vessels) and increased permeability (leakage from blood vessels), two of the pathological processes that contribute to the vision loss associated with neovascular AMD

[osprey]

Macugen and avastin (the DNA drug lucentis is avastin) are both blockers of vegf not egf or egfr.

Then why would EYET and outside experts say that the two trails are not comparable. Even UBS analysts agrees.
<<<<<<<<Hmmm, that is a tough one. Maybe it has to do with money, this being the stock market and eyet having dropped 50%. I rarely hear CEOs doing damage control admit that their drug is soon to be obsolete and their company will be bankrupt.>>>>LOL

<<<<Outside experts? I'm sure that these outside experts were vetted in advance to say what the company wants them to say. They may even be on the payroll. I've been an outside expert myself. The rule is, a good outside expert does what they are paid to do. To be sure, most will only accept payment for what they really think. If your outside expert is hard up for money, probably isn't any good anyway.>>>>>>>>

<<<<<<UBS agrees? Probably Henry Blodgett does too. Wall Street unlike outside experts will say anything for money no matter how stupid, ridiculous, or untrue. Remember Enron, the bubble of y2k etc. UBS is one of the worst of a bad lot. They've been in trouble with the SEC over their pumping analysts before. >>>>>>>>

<<<<<<<No position in either DNA or EYET. Nor do I really have that much interest in either right now. Both companies seem to be OK but their stocks are too richly priced to really take off. Since both drugs target the same molecule, the only real way to tell which is better is a head to head, randomized, double blinded phase 4 trial. It will happen if they both get approved. The other criteria include side effects, cost, ease of administration and direct experience of the docs and patients using the drugs. Who knows, they may just turn out to be roughly equivalent.>>>>>>>>>>>


------------
Regarding news this week, UBS reported on 5-24-05 Briefing.com "that comparing Macugen and Lucentis study data may be an "apples to oranges" comparison, as the phase III trial for Macugen included all 3 subforms of subfoveal wet A>M.D., whereas Marina included only minimally classic/occult A.M.D. patients.Furthermore, the Macugen Phase III trial allowed the concomitant use of photodynamic therapy while Lucentis' Marina did not."
------------

Anyway, do you have position in this stock ?