Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : CLTR COULTER PHARMACEUTICAL -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gordon James who wrote (410)	11/29/1999 9:12:00 PM
From: RWReeves	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 666

A time honored function of marketing is to take problems and make them into features. I can't help thinking Bex's dosimetry is like that. The whole dosimetry shuffle will increase the complexity and cost of the treatment and make it vulnerable to a cheaper, easier therapy. I still have trouble with the idea of a gamma emitter coupled to the specificity of an antibody for delivery- I think somebody succinctly posted a while back that just the WBI from the hot Iodine without the Ab would likely give you equivalent results. I have to wonder if the market isn't really looking for a dose calculated on the normal parameters instead of titration. Of course, this is long run, immediately, efficacy will do the trick. Efficiency comes later. Sorry this sounds like Short Stuff, I've been long on them several times but feel the world is catching up to them quickly. RWR

To: Gordon James who wrote (410)	12/2/1999 12:07:00 AM
From: Bob L	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 666

There's a new article on Zevalin: Phase I/II Trial of IDEC-Y2B8 Radioimmunotherapy for Treatment of Relapsed or Refractory CD20+ B-Cell Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 17, Issue 12 (December), 1999: 3793-3803. Available full text online via free trial at jco.org. (I believe the free trial expires at the end of 1999). I would of course be interested in anybody's comments on this. I've only had a chance to glance at the article, but I noticed this line: "A significant correlation was noted between percent bone marrow involvement with NHL at baseline and hematologic toxicity." Overall, the toxicity didn't look that much different from Bexxar. As you pointed out, Gordon, it really shouldn't since both set up maximum doses based on hematologic toxicity. If it isn't toxic, give 'em some more. This phase II study used dosimetry with 111In as usual with Zevalin. A couple of us have speculated that dosimetry is being used in the trial but clinical application will not require it. I now suspect I didn't know what I was talking about when I said that. I went back and looked at the phase III protocol and it also uses dosimetry. How are they going to get clinical approval without dosimetry when the phase III used it?