IDPH--Positive preliminary results for pivotal trial of ID 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 : IDPH--Positive preliminary results for pivotal trial of ID

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: I. Luttichuys who wrote (923)	5/28/1997 6:34:00 PM
From: Brad C. Dunlap	of 1762

Hi Bennett, well a person has to do what they have to do and I certainly can understand your concerns and only time will tell if your right or wrong. For the past 2 1/2 years Smithkline has been selling and everytime my fears are that they are selling for a negative reason relating to CE9.1 which turns out to be completely false. It does appear that this go around that Smithkline is selling their entire postion and that is the current overhang in the stock. In spite of this selling by SmithKline my confidence in CE9.1 is very high. I would be very interested in hearing more specifically what info you are hearing and where the info originates, since this is counter to the many bits of info that I have uncovered. I am aware of negative comments comming from IMNX that focus on the toxicty that CE9.1 displayed at last years ACR conference at the high dose of 140mg. Basically this info that has been circulating is true in that patients at this high dose did develope rashes and the 140mg dose was discontinued. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the type of info that your friend might be hearing since this info has been circulating in the medical and investment field. What is very interesting about this that SmithKline determined that the rashes where not a result of the drug but rather the administration of twice weekly as opposed to once per week. The current phase III involves multiple doses with the high dose of 240mg. which certainly tells me that Smithkline is backing their words that the rashes were not a direct result of high dosage. Also I discussed at last years ACR conference that in another phase II study smithkline used dosages of over 500mg with none of the rashes or other significant toxicities that might have developed at the high dosage.This study was not completed for presentation and to date has never been disclosed. I might also add if you had included the 140mg dosage at last years ACR conference then Idec clearly had the most efficacious results. Nevertheless, we're now in a larger study and surely anything can happen. Last week Shekar Basu of First Boston reiterated his strong buy recommendation and I noticed that Idec is on First Bostons Focus list[not sure if it was there before]. Shekhar mentioned that smithkline could be selling their remaining 500,000 sh but made no explanation. Today, there were comments from Montgomery Sec that I could not get my hands on that came across the multex system that evidently were positive since the stock moved from 21 3/4 bid to 22 3/8 bid shortly thereafter but the selling from smith barney[smithkline] moved it down a bit on mkt close. I don't think that they would be reiterating their buys without inquiring deeply into the motives of Smithkline. But then again, everyone makes mistakes. My beliefs are that they aren't making any mistakes based on conversations that I have had and I too feel very comfortable about the smithkline selling. If there where problems with CE9.1, I believe that Smithkline would sell and immediately cut their loses with this drug, however, I'm catchng wind of other possible applications that are being discussed that smithkline has first rights of refusal. Anyway Bennett, we'll miss you as a regular and wish you nothing but success, but something tells me you'll be back in a short period of time..

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next