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: Sam Citron who wrote (568)	3/7/2005 9:26:11 PM
From: zeta1961	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 946

Sam, sorry for any confusion..by deal breaker I was saying that if Xyotax indeed shows equivalent efficacy to taxol..I'll even venture to extend that now to: if absolutely everything about the two agents is equal(efficacy, side effects) the fact that it's given in just 10 minutes(huge)...it protects the hair follicles, avoiding alopecia, it's my opinion that oncologists and patients would choose Xyotax.. Hair loss is a HUGE psychologic issue with cancer patients..young and believe it or not older patients also and most especially with women of all ages(remember that taxol(including its generics but too lazy to spell out paclitaxel!) is used in breast cancer, ovarian in addition to lung.. I do some oncology consulting on the side and just recently received an update from a 70ish year old woman..second to telling us how pleased she is with the cancer's regression, it was her hair growing back that she expressed satisfaction.. These days in oncology, as you know, there is a real push for QOL considerations as evidenced by Alimta's approval eventhough it did not show a survival benefit, these targeted molecules like gleevec, tarceva etc.. In answer to your second question, alopecia is a result of each radiation and chemo separately..the poor folk who have to have radiation and chemo for anything in the head and neck region(throat, esophogeal, brain) get doubly inflicted..in many cases their hair regrowth is limited as a result of the direct and double 'hit'... Besides the body appearance issue, these patients have to use extra care in protecting their heads from the natural elements like sun, heat, cold..we have kept our hair during our evolution for good reasons<g>.. As rkrw pointed, many take this in stride, try to make light of it("my shampoo costs are down")but it's something they'd gladly not have to deal with..wigs(good ones) are costly, hats after a while get costly..sure, it's a trifle concern compared to survival but if there's something as effective without this effect..the answer seems obvious to them and their oncologists.. Was that more clear?..let me know.. Lastly, Wick, the CEO of TELK also pointed to the issue of alopecia with the women in their ovarian cancer trials at JPMorgan in January..to paraphrase:[when speaking with clinians and patients, we found out how much alopecia is a concern..based on my experience, I had no reason to question the validity of his claim even if it was for his marketing presentation.. Zeta