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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aknahow who wrote (14746)	9/19/2000 10:26:54 AM
From: manfredhasler	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17367

George, Re:seems a bit fishy, at least to me. I was not yet aware of your numbers. Must be part of the full report. I did not get the full report yet. From the figures you provide - at first sight - I think it is reasonable to conclude that the notion that the drug was withhold to long (due to inevitable logistic reasons as Cacaito learned us) can be backed. So what? Let me ask the question again: was it necessary to continue the study, as it became obvious that too many patient (57 patients that died or that met criteria for imminent death before receiving the study drug) had to be excluded - due to logistic reasons? What kind of reaffirmation for a proper execution do you get out of the full report now that even more patients died within the study groups as your numbers suggest - due to logistic reasons? Would it not be mandatory for a careful monitored study to halt it at an early point and to make the proper readjustments of the study design? At the end, this study might have been just waste of money, and what irritates me much more, waste of time, and waste of a great opportunity. Fishy? You go after the FDA. I do what I find is warranted. Regards, Manfred