SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (MLNM)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: microcapfun who wrote (1439)3/22/2003 5:58:38 PM
From: Icebrg  Read Replies (4) of 3044
 
>>Does anyone have reason for any optimism regarding MLN02 or is it appropriate to more or less write it off?>>

That's an interesting question and it has been discussed now and then, here and there on the SI threads. Most of the times between me and Rick.

In principle MLN02 should work. The results achieved from their trial were not very good. Although there were some hints that the agent had some effect. Re-reading the press release (again) put out by MLNM after the conclusion of the phase II trial, at least I get the impression that MLNM/DNA have not yet made up their mind about what they are going to do with the agent.

The results achieved with natalizumab in its phase II trial appear to have been "better". And MLN02 should be able to achieve similar results as the mode of action of the two drugs appears to be very similar. Rick's theory is the the two mAbs are binding slightly different epitopes and that this might be the reason for what appears to be a difference in efficacy. (Or perhaps Antegren will in the end turn out not be efficacious in Crohn's).

I believe, that MLNM want to see the results from:

a. The UC trial,

b. The ELN/BGEN natalizumab study

before they decide what they want to do.

If either of these studies show strong results there is a chance that they will decide to move forward. The rationale being the similarity between the two agents/indications.

As far as I can see, it is DNA who will have the final say about how to proceed, as it is they who will have to shoulder the responsibility for the phase III development.

Erik
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News