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 : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Harold Engstrom who wrote (3694)	5/8/2001 9:37:22 AM
From: Mark Bong	Respond to of 52153

Harold, if it is the same molecule as stated by many including Ares Serono, then the three times a week dosage does have a major impact on efficacy. There is another question. What impact does it have on the patient? Three times a week seems like a tough regimen. Would the higher dosage cause long-term safety issues? How would the patient do on a prolonged basis? For sure the data looks compelling, but I feel that there are still many questions to be answered. In addition, Serono has used pretty severe tactics to brow beat the FDA, including using Congressional reps to push them. I know that civil servants don’t like this, and I would suggest that the FDA would demand a great deal of proof before this one gets approval. As for Biogen, their future is in Amevive and ELAN, and they had better dig up a few more good licensing opportunities.

To: Harold Engstrom who wrote (3694)	5/8/2001 9:55:03 AM
From: Biomaven	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

Harold, <<Rebif/Avonex>> Well the dosage is pretty different - Rebif is 44 micrograms 3 times a week subcutaneous, whereas Avonex is 30 micrograms IM once a week. I'm surprised that BGEN is holding up as well as it is - looks like I may have been unduly pessimistic here and the news was already in the stock? Peter

To: Harold Engstrom who wrote (3694)	5/8/2001 11:44:05 AM
From: IRWIN JAMES FRANKEL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

BGEN - The quote I found most significant is: "Patients treated with Avonex® had 50% more new lesions in the brain than those treated with Rebif®. This result is also highly statistically significant with a p value less than 0.0001." Defining exacerbations is rather subjective, determined by interogating the patient. Lesions which they must be defining by MRI should be more reliable. With a P value UNDER .0001 it is stunning. Unless there is something screwy going on Rebif should get approved promptly. I can't believe that the significance of this news is in BGEN. VL indicates that 78% of revenue comes from Avonex. I would not want to hold BGEN and wait for AMEVIVE, good as it sounds. ij