VD's Model Portfolio & Discussion Thread 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 : VD's Model Portfolio & Discussion Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Vector1 who wrote (1213)	6/14/1997 11:54:00 AM
From: Pseudo Biologist	of 9719

Vector, thanks for the replies. Your posted statistics are consistent with what is being said in IDEC's 10K and with statements in a couple of scientific papers I've checked (left references at work - will post if interested). It seems CLTR's drug is doing better than IDEC's; hope we agree we cannot compare either one directly with Oncolym's data on the intermediate- and high-grade forms. I dug out the BioCentury issue (pages A7-A9 of Sept 23, 1996) and, besides giving an excellent comparison between IDEC and CLTR's NHL drugs, it contains some data on CLTR's drug performance on intermediate-grade disease. While for low-grade and transformed low-grade the total response (complete +partial) was 75-86%; for intermediate-grade was 5% complete, and 42% partial. The caveat here is that there were only 19 patients in the latter group (vs. 40 or so in the the low-grade and transformed groups). I think this is one reason why they will focus pivotal trial on low-grade form (besides other reasons you list). I still do not know what the %'s are among the different grades are for new cases (the 50-60K number in the US). Have you found data on this? M-PB

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next