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: Boyce Burge who wrote (4462)	3/23/1998 6:07:00 PM
From: Biomaven	Read Replies (1) of 9719

<<CBMI - Stryker news was a little disappointing... though the methods (OP-1 vs autotransplant) were "equivalent" the X-ray data tended to favor autotransplant>> There seem to be two things going on here: A. Neither group did as well as predicted when measured by the x-ray evidence. ... But Stryker said follow-up x-ray analysis of the fracture repairs -- for both OP-1 and autograft patients -- did not meet the success target set before the trial began. "The blinded radiographic assessment by an independent panel of radiologists showed that neither group achieved the predicted level of cortical bridging," Stryker said. B. Autograft did 10% better long term as measured by x-ray: ... The postoperative x-rays immediately following surgery showed a bias toward the autograft group because the transplanted autograft bone is radiodense, in contrast to the OP-1 Device which is transparent to x-rays. The radiographs improved for both groups at comparable rates throughout the 24 month follow-up period, however, radiographic assessment of the number of patients with cortical bridging remained approximately 10% higher for the autograft group. Dr. Muschler noted that there is no evidence in the data to suggest that the radiographic differences observed resulted in a difference in clinical return to function or increase in re-operation. ------- Now "A" seems irrelevant to me unless there's some third treatment which is better than either. "B" is more of a concern for CBMI. However I recall reading that a H&Q analyst has pointed out that x-ray evidence can be deceptive here, because the autograft can look better on the x-ray than it really is. (I guess you can get a solid chunk of bone that isn't actually well connected.) CBMI has a $300m market cap. I think they're due to get around 15% royalties on what is estimated to be a $300m - $500m market, so they don't look too expensive to me. On the other hand, Biogen has been pretty quiet lately on the kidney application... Peter

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next