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: tuck who wrote (9551)	11/23/2003 2:49:39 PM
From: tuck	Respond to of 52153

Here's a free related article ("commentary") on how efficient clinical development might go: www2.us.elsevierhealth.com Cheers, Tuck

To: tuck who wrote (9551)	11/23/2003 11:44:19 PM
From: Biomaven	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

Required reading: Signals on PII: why it hasn't weeded out weak drugs Agreed - required reading. But they profess to be puzzled by why biotechs do skimpy Phase II's. I don't think it's any mystery - money and time-to-market. Most biotechs simply can't afford to spend big bucks and lots of time getting it right. There are some obvious exceptions - NBIX's Indiplon is a good example. But look at MRK's stumble with a Substance P drug in depression - it's not only the biotechs that can get surprised by a Phase III failure. And look at ALXN's mishaps for another example of how even a fairly comprehensive set of Phase II's can lead to a muddled Phase III result. There is actually a micro-cap that more companies should use in designing their Phase II's - Pharsight (PHST on the Bulletin Board). The fact that it's no longer a listed stock indicates how much success they had in convincing companies to do rationally designed trials. Peter