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 : VD's Model Portfolio & Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Vector1 who wrote (7277)	12/11/1999 1:05:00 AM
From: Pseudo Biologist	Respond to of 9719

V1, indeed that's the point. The protocol I pointed to before has 6 cycles and is concurrent with Ritux; this may have more toxicity than Fludara light, as you call it, followed a few weeks later by Bexxar. Thus, at least in the trials I am aware of, the additional Fludara is not a constant (my previous, incorrect, assumption). Now, IDPH could copy the Fludara+Bex design by replacing Bex with Ritux, but, as you suggest, chances are that this will not be nearly as effective. So, yes Flu+Bex still smells like a rose. On the hair loss, did see Gordon's comments from Cornell's Leonard. Intriguing that this site tirgan.com lists hair loss as one of the side effects. Maybe with the full 6-cycle dose, but not with the light version? The package insert fludara.com does list 3 (out of 32) cases of alopecia in one study; 0 of 101 in another. Typically no hair loss sounds about right. PB