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 : Abgenix, Inc. (ABGX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Icebrg who wrote (205)	5/31/2003 5:36:40 PM
From: Miljenko Zuanic	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 590

Erik, First, lets me say that I have large position on ABGX and am looking for reasons to hold or to sell what I have. So, I more critical on their compound than to those at competitors. << I suppose Amgen would very much have preferred to say nothing at all at this point.>> I do not buy this at all. Never will. While there is agreement between investigator and sponsor to what and when results will be reported, ASCO is place where betel for market share and prestige intensify. << I suppose Amgen would very much have preferred to say nothing at all at this point.>> Do you think that IF AMGN have something to say about any of their candidate (like what did DNA reported) they will be silent? NO! Future speed of accrual, investigator and pts excitements, cost of the trial, …all depend of the early data that candidate generated. You let news fly, if good! So, and in general, SD does bring survival benefit and mean/median TTP. For advance and progressive cancer. 6 months after they have interim data for 40 pts (8 weeks end-point) they should have additional data to present to oncologist. Why this data are not for public, for investors? Geze, you have no idea how much I HATE THIS TYPE OF NEWS! << But we cannot be sure that Merck will let BMY/ImClone use their data or that FDA will accept foreign trials that might not meet their requirements. >> For RIGHT price Merck will sell mother, father and whole family! Also, I think that FDA will accept Merck data, as it was early reported by BMY when they have discussion with FDA. << I would be very surprised it that patent will hold closer inspection.>. Just as idea that BMY can make AMGN life miserable in regards the ABX-EGF is enough. DNA and IMCL patents may not hold in real, but I will not bet that IF DNA can/may suppress both competitors (IMCL/BMY and AMGN/ABGX) will not try hard. <<I simply don't think the idea of using two different cancer agents in combination is inventive enough to be patentable.>> If this is just from trial and error, than not. IF they can prove that excessive lab and animal work (an-ambiguous results) brought them to conclusion that combination is necessary than they have good point. However, RPR experiment at that time (IMCL license patents from RPR, filed in 1995) do not support second approach and thinking. <<What is you opinion of the addition of another 50 patients to the trial?>> They amended protocol with inclusion of the second CC group, those who do not express HIGH (+2 and +3) level of the EGFr, those with +1 expression. So, those additional 50 pts will in part cover this expansion. Also, they (I hope) will be looking on additional bio-markers to better project who may/will respond to anti-EGFr drug. <<I believe that it could be very useful to have ABX-EGF keeping the cancer stable and then use something else to kill off the individual cancer cells.>> Yes, it is right approach even when cancers progress on chemo, to use some chemo in combination. But, do not wait too long, as it may be too late. Second line therapy will be best, imo. By now, I thought that AMGN/ABGX would initiate pivotal PIII, second line CC. So, you know why I am FRUSTRATED with note on TSC. Miljenko PS: F*** them all. I am going for cappuccino and play boccee.