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 : Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (MLNM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Icebrg who wrote (1440)	3/22/2003 6:05:48 PM
From: Icebrg	Respond to of 3044

Corvertible program Listening to Ken Bates' presentation at SG Cowen, I absolutely get the impression that MLNM is about to repay the convertibles in April. - There is no way they are going to issue shares at the current depressed share prices. - There is no benefit in extending the maturity for another year at a high costs, as they are not able to use the funds in a meaningful way over such a short period. Conclusion: Either they will have to be very smart or they will repay. Just as good I suppose. Apart from that it seems that they are pulling the hand-brake and pushing the foot-brake at the same time over in Cambridge. There is a lot of pruning going on. Putting in Bates in his position might have been a good move. At least it seems he has a fair idea about what has to be done. I wouldn't be surprised if their new partnership (H1 2003) for Velcade will bring a second product to the US oncology sales force that they are about to create. Erik

To: Icebrg who wrote (1440)	3/22/2003 6:42:55 PM
From: scaram(o)uche	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3044

>> Rick's theory is the the two mAbs are binding slightly different epitopes and that this might be the reason for what appears to be a difference in efficacy. << I know that there's not a hint of intent behind it, but that's not correct. The antibodies bind to very different epitopes, one expressed on two relevant (?) intregin molecules and the other (MLN02) on one of the two. I am using "integrin molecule" in the sense of combined alpha and beta chains. More later..... I've been promising the kids a game of handball for about an hour, and my daughter is standing here scowling at me, noting that I just switched to a new subject. But, before I split...... I expected MLN02 to be effective, and I looked at the preclinical data closely when I did a slightly informal (covered by retainer, but not of sufficient depth to go beyond that) DD job on LeukoSite, before they went public. And I fully share Erik's opinion about MLNM's course of action, going forward.

To: Icebrg who wrote (1440)	3/23/2003 8:00:52 PM
From: rkrw	Respond to of 3044

FYI: MLN02 colitis trial was an apparent bust according to docs at an investment bank healthcare conference I attended last week. On Antegren the docs were split, one modestly optimistic, the second not too impressed. Either way, remicade is much more dominant and effective in Crohn's than I had realized.

To: Icebrg who wrote (1440)	4/15/2003 5:50:55 PM
From: Icebrg	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3044

There were problems with the webcasted CC today. Very poor sound quality and after a while the transmission was completely cut off. Anyhow, before the transmission ended, I noted that they mentioned that they are planning to highlight MLN02 data in IBD at a conference in May. There has been doubts with regard to this agent due to a perceived lack of good results and PR-based enthusiasm following the conclusion of the phase II trial in the Crohn's disease indication. If however MLNM think it is worthwhile to mention a future conference presentation of the IBD-data, one (or at least I) cannot but assume, that the data are at least good enough to warrant a continuation into phase III. (Where DNA will meet the development costs). Erik