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: Biomaven who wrote (5983)	3/20/2002 9:22:31 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

This is the source I used to claim the news was old. Such a logical case was made I knew in my heart it was a correct analysis. Besides PDLI collapsed about the same time which made me even more convinced. Know one should not rely on inter-net post but I trust the original source even if he was quoting someone else. From: gwohanka Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 2:57 pm Subject: Borrowed from S.I. To:Ian Stromberg who wrote (5715)<br> From: Biomaven <br> Tuesday, Feb 19, 2002 5:38 PM<br> Respond to of 5718 <br><br><br> <PDLI><br><br> I've now seen the Cowen report (thanks, S!). They acknowledge that the trial is not unblinded, but say that their conversations with doctors<br> who treated an estimated 20-25% of the patients in the trial lead them to believe it won't be successful, particularly in view of the other<br> promising new drugs on the horizon.<br><br> Note that the trial was vs. placebo in patients first treated with cyclosporine. The relapse rate from cyclosporine is well known, so it seems<br> somewhat credible to me that the doctors could in fact tell without unblinding.<br><br> Sure would be nice to get some good news for a change...<br><br> Peter

To: Biomaven who wrote (5983)	4/11/2002 12:00:00 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

Learning from the past or about to make a new mistake? The PDLI psoriasis trial results were easy to figure out by analyst that spoke to doctors involved in the trial, before unblinding. Even I understood why. Does AVAN present a similar situation? Good HDL levels will be measured. Trial probably had fast enrollment. Six month booster shots probably already given to many trial participants and while HDL levels probably measured frequently they would IMO certainly have been measured prior to the booster. Even while blinded the results of HDL measurement would provide good clue to value of the vaccine. No real reason for placebo group HDL to increase. From 10K for 2001 These data were extremely helpful in moving the program forward to a placebo controlled Phase II study, which was initiated in August 2001, in approximately 200 patients with low levels of HDL cholesterol. The objectives of the study are to evaluate the safety, immunogenicity and dose-response relationship of the CETi-1 product in patients who receive an initial immunization followed by boosters. The primary endpoint is the change in HDL cholesterol measured after the six-month booster and results are expected from the trial during 2003. As clinical data become available, we plan to seek a corporate partner to complete development and to commercialize the CETi-1 vaccine. Disclosure. Own a very small dollar amount of AVAN. Interest mainly because PDLI situation made me realize results of some very few trials could be obvious prior to unblinding, and AVAN moving up sharply around time of booster shots.