CLTR COULTER PHARMACEUTICAL Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : CLTR COULTER PHARMACEUTICAL

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Vector1 who wrote (385)	11/21/1999 3:17:00 AM
From: Bob L	Read Replies (1) of 666

I didn't mean to imply anything underhanded in the discussion of safety of bexxar. In fact, I didn't say they "downplayed" it. I said "vague." And I'm mostly referring to my dog-eared copies of the published journal articles, which of course are much earlier than the abstract data we are discussing. There just isn't a lot of detail on the toxicity questions even in these articles. And it is a bit frustrating when the abstracts mention things like percentage with platelets below 10k, for example. Why not stick with Grade 3 and 4 criteria? That's why they have those criteria, so there is a standard of reference. I say this with the greatest respect for the people involved in the research. I am not worthy to wash their lab coats. But I wish they would give me more better data. Ironically, the best discussion of toxicity for radiolabeled monoclonals in lymphoma is by DeNardo about Oncolym, which of course has been run about into the ground by Techniclone's bumbling. You say, "Ask yourself if you had this incideous disease which treatment would you choose. Tough call between CHOP plus Rit or Fludar plus Bex." Yes, that is a tough call. These decisions are no fun at all.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next