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 : Cell Therapeutics (CTIC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Icebrg who wrote (540)	3/7/2005 3:06:58 PM
From: Sam Citron	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 946

But approval may not be the critical issue. How much premium can the drug command to generic taxol if there is no additional survival benefit? Is there a follow-on molecule? Sam

To: Icebrg who wrote (540)	3/7/2005 3:31:19 PM
From: former_pgs	Respond to of 946

>It is not only a matter of alopecia. Not being based on Cremafore is another advantage. Less pain, cardiac side-effects (?) and neurotoxicities a third. Clearly, these patients deserve a "milder" type of chemotherapy if such a thing is available, costs notwithstanding< I was using the hair loss comment as a general and/or symbolic one with regards to the side effect comparison between xyotax and taxol/paclitaxel. It's pure speculation at the moment, but I think that the impact of the decreased side effect profile reasonably depends on the observed magnitude of the decrease. That is why I hesitate to give too much weight to this consideration at this time. I guess we wait until ASCO to really be able to assess the positive points of this trial. A hazard ratio would have been nice though :-)