SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Arthur Radley who wrote (14831)12/20/2004 5:41:25 PM
From: Ian@SI  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 52153
 
You must have forgotten Peter's first rule of biotech investing.
Never buy a biotech with a name change.

Wasn't ENCY formerly known as Texas Biotech? Didn't they contribute a drug to an Alxn collaboration that failed? (Sitaxathan or something similar).



To: Arthur Radley who wrote (14831)12/20/2004 5:44:28 PM
From: Biomaven  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 52153
 
Not sure if this ENCY news is actually that terrible - seems like the low dose didn't work, but the question is whether this hurts their key high dose that much. Didn't get a chance to list to their CC though. Their PR is kind of confusing - don't know whether deliberately so or not.

Anyone catch their call?

Peter



To: Arthur Radley who wrote (14831)12/20/2004 5:50:08 PM
From: bio_kruncher  Respond to of 52153
 
I don't see the ENCY results as such bad news. From previous trials 100 and 200mg showed equal promise of efficacy with 100 being more liver friendly. so new pivitol is running 100 and 50. This news out that saw 50 inefective is not so bad. this trial is a bit small, 100 mg looks reasonably good. I'd say it still looks good for the pivitol trial. I think there is a good chance the 100 will be as efficacious as Bosentan and safer.
Bk