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: zeta1961 who wrote (15075)	1/3/2005 6:05:18 PM
From: Biomaven	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

The CTIC bulls say a APPX approval is bullish for CTIC; the CTIC bears say a APPX approval is bearish for CTIC, and vice versa for rejection. <g> It's really a mixed bag. Approval of Abraxane means another competitor for Xyotax with many of the same advantages - quicker administration than Taxol, no cremaphor, better SE profile. But if the FDA approves what everyone believes to be a shoddy Abraxane package, then the assumption is they won't quibble too much about Xyotax if the latter's data is at least reasonable. My instinct is that it's better for CTIC in the longer run if Abraxane gets turned down, although a negative decision might produce some sympathetic CTIC weakness in the short run. Ultimately the test will be the comparison of their respective clinical results - and clearly Xyotax has by far the better trial design at least. My bottom line guess is that CTIC will show a little weakness no matter what the APPX outcome. Peter

To: zeta1961 who wrote (15075)	1/4/2005 7:40:10 AM
From: rkrw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

Anyone find it odd none of the big rx moved into the modified taxol markets? Too focused on epothilones and missing a low hanging fruit? appx is an interesting one. Great underlying business. Abraxane filing very controversial. Drug inlicensed from company owned 100% by ceo. So if approved ceo will profit from huge appx stake and onerous royalties to sub company. I also don't quite understand why doing modified taxol trials hasn't been very straightforward from a regulatory perspective. As far as impact on snus and ctic, I think rejection would be best for them as I think the belief is appx screwed up the trials as opposed to some underlying problem with the concept of new taxol formulations. If approved then you get into the issue of which formulation is best, who has the data, pricing etc.