Replies to post #14094 on Biotech Values

[walldiver]

I intend to find out whether or not Dr. Higano has discussed 9901/9902A results with the hedgies. I would imagine that any info she may have provided didn't help the hedgies with 9901, since the PR from last October caught them with their pants down. I also believe that she did not discuss 9902A progression data with the hedgies, as the short-seller mouthpiece analysts at UBS and Brean Murray would have said something about 9902A in their negative DNDN reports prior to 1/11/05. DNDN caught everybody off-guard by unblinding that trial for ttp data in January, when they had previously said they would not unblind until the 3-yr survival data was mature.

The only relevant info IMO that Higano could give the hedgies would therefore have to relate to 9902A survival data. If she disclosed p values for THAT, then she should be locked up. I highly doubt she did, and it's entirely possible that she did not discuss any DNDN Phase 3 trials at all, with the possible exception being 9902B's enrollment status.

[io_io]

Dr. Celestia Higano / DNDN

When I think about it, yes its possible, even probable, that the hedgies knew that 9902a would not hit the survival endpoint. Probably not Dr. Higano, but they had other ways to find out.

However, now that we know the top-line results, the unknowns (your point #3) don't trouble me too much. After all, we could guess them within 10% of their values, possibly even 5%.

The biggest unknown now however is the Regulatory Unknown. Can the hedgies ascertain that before us ?? I hope not !

Right now I think they will be skewered unless they un-wind their shorts.