Hello all,
Did anybody flag the following from the Lehman ASCO update posted by Bob Z yesterday:
"The fourth abstract is a phase II trial using oral
LGD1057 in AIDS related Kaposi sarcoma. An interim analysis of 66 patients was completed. 38 patients received at least 16 weeks of drug and were included in the analysis. Partial responses were seen in 14 patients (37%), stable disease in 15 (39%) and progressive disease in 4 (11%). 11 patients withdrew from the study due to adverse events, which included grade 3 or 4 elevations of triglycerides (5 pts.), headaches (8 pts.) and skin problems. Cholesterol and triglyceride levels rose significantly from a mean baseline cholesterol level of 187 to 277 and a mean baseline triglyceride level from 240 to 788."
Any opinion on the number of patients who withdrew due to adverse events, and to the increases in cholesterol and triglycerides?
Just a couple of thoughts on some issues that have been floating around for the past few days (I'm just getting caught up after being out of town for several days).
1 - IMHO, Mudcat and tonyt were more right than Henry when they questioned H&Q's estimates for 1999. Anyway you look at it someone did some sloppy or poorly thought through work, and it was quietly corrected. Net, net, this shows a value in contrary opinion on this and other threads, although the sniping and the volume of comments are a waste of all our time.
2 - I'm not that wild about the toxicity of SRGN's products. However, I agree with most that Robinson et al probably have thought things through, and merit the benefit of the doubt on this one. If revenue from Seragen's CTCL product is anywhere near the numbers projected by the analysts, this is a great deal. And $80M+ for $200M+ in R&D may be a huge bargain, or a waste of money, depending on the value of that R&D ... again, I can give Robinson the benefit of the doubt on this. On this line, GLYC's R&D has proven to be worth less than it cost GLYC to develop it, fyi, and IMO. Of course, there was GLYC's cash from their debentures which drove that deal.
3 - I've mentioned this before. The only thing I don't like about LGND's deals is the high percentage of compensation to LGND in the form of stock purchases by their partner. That's my biggest issue with LGND at this time ... dilution.
4 - This thread wears me out.
Peter |
