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 (2262)	11/7/2004 11:04:51 AM
From: former_pgs	Respond to of 3044

The fact that the first efficacy parametre detailed in the PR came out in favor of a competitor is definitely a hit. That clearly sets the tone for the PR, and puts MLNM in a defensive position with respect to these data. However, my personal feeling is that these trial results will be more beneficial to the reps detailing Integrilin than they will be to MLNM's current share price. Dunno about the PR timing...

To: Icebrg who wrote (2262)	11/8/2004 10:06:53 AM
From: Icebrg	Respond to of 3044

PROTECT Study Shows Equivocal Results by: mr_nose_hair 11/08/04 08:09 am Msg: 55996 of 56000 [Clipped from the Yahoo board] OPINION (SB) Millennium on Saturday announced the results of its PROTECT study at the annual meeting of the American Heart Association (AHA) being held in New Orleans. The PROTECT trial was a randomized, open-label study designed to evaluate the effect of Integrilin on coronary outcomes in high-risk patients compared to treatment with The Medicine's Company's (MDCO -- NR) Angiomax. The trial enrolled 857 patients and its primary endpoint was coronary flow reserve (CFR), a measure of coronary artery flow. Results from the study showed that patients who were treated with Angiomax had a better CFR on an intent-to-treat analysis. When this data was imputed (as pre-defined) for abrupt closure, no reflow, and thrombotic bail-out during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the results were not statistically significant (p=0.13). In terms of myocardial perfusion, which has been linked to improved survival, Integrilin showed a statistically significant improvement versus Angiomax (p=0.048). Myocardial perfusion, measured by the TIMI Myocardial Perfusion Grade (TMPG), is a measure of how effectively blood flow to the heart is restored after therapeutic and mechanical intervention. In the study, 13.8% more patients treated with Integrilin achieved normal perfusion, a rating of TMPG 3. Integrilin also showed a statistically significant reduction in secondary endpoints including the median duration of ischemia following PCI compared to Angiomax. The median duration of Integrilin-treated patients was 36 minutes compared to 169 for Angiomax (p=0.013). There were no major incidences of bleeding in patients treated with Integrilin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) or in Angiomax-treated patients. Patients treated with Integrilin and Lovenox, however, had a 1.5% incidence of major bleeding. The data also suggested that Angiomax is safer than Integrilin since 2.5% of Integrilin patients had a minor bleeding event compared to 0.4% of Angiomax-treated patients (p=0.027). Integrilin is currently the market leader in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). In the PROTECT study, Millennium endeavored to show that Integrilin confers benefits over Angiomax on cardiac blood flow in high-risk patients following PCI. Nevertheless, in our view, the trial fell short of proving this hypothesis. In fact, we believe that the trial suggests that Angiomax does have a therapeutic role in these patients that merits further investigation. Recall that the results of The Medicines Company's REPLACE-2 trial suggested that Angiomax was non-inferior to the use of heparin plus provisional use of a GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor. While the data from the PROTECT study are equivocal, we do not believe that Angiomax will replace Integrilin in this market simply from the results of this trial. In our view, further studies would be required to more definitely establish which drug should be used in these patients. Shares of Millennium continue to show resilience despite disappointing Velcade sales. We believe that investors are looking for further data at the upcoming American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting (where in excess of twenty Velcade abstracts will be presented on December 3-7) to evaluate the future growth prospects for Velcade in front-line multiple myeloma. We expect that the stock would trade up heading into this meeting since we expect positive data to be presented. We note that our valuation analysis already includes use of Velcade in front-line multiple myeloma as well as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (indications where we expect positive data at ASH). As is customary, we would expect a sell-off in the stock after the meeting due to lack of catalysts. While we maintain our Hold rating on the stock from a long-term prospective, near-term oriented accounts