Biotech Valuation 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 : Biotech Valuation

CRSP 55.09

-3.4%

9:39 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: tuck who wrote (14606)	12/9/2004 5:40:24 PM
From: Ian@SI	Read Replies (1) of 52153

Tuck, I certainly agree with your last comment re Risk/reward. FDA seems to approve PFE applications more easily than submissions from smaller companies. QLT had an Analyst day today. Slides are available and contain sufficient detail on the issue to allow you to avoid listening to the whole 3 1/2 hours of Presentations, Q&A. Interesting analysis and details on the Macugen filing may well affect what speculation you're willing to make on the Dec 17th decision. If there are real retinal specialists on the AC, I'd have a tough time understanding any unanimous decision to approve M. Safety is worse than Visudyne. It doesn't appear possible to assess M efficacy as V was optionally included in both Tx and Sham groups with dosage left up to each specialist. It would seem to me that even if PFE/EYET gets the approval, they're going to have an extraordinarily difficult time convincing any retinal specialist to bring a patient back 6 times a year forever rather than the 5 times over 2 years for V. Unless the pts are misinformed, I certainly can't see any pt opting for M. Sorry to be so wishy washy. <G> Good luck with whatever play you decide to make. Ian

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next