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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bob zagorin who wrote (17208)	5/11/2006 3:10:36 PM
From: Edscharp	Respond to of 17367

zacks.com

To: bob zagorin who wrote (17208)	5/11/2006 3:10:49 PM
From: Edscharp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17367

Do you mean this Zack's report? "it is difficult to get excited about Xoma. As of yet, there isn’t a lot of meat on the table." zacks.com EATURED EXPERT: Dr. Scott W. & Nadine Wong 17-NOV-05 Nadine Wong, editor of the BioTech Stock Report newsletter, discusses a biotech company that is lacking “meat” right now. Read what this expert means. Also, find out what Wong finds encouraging concerning this company and why. Then discover what kind of an impact a potential revenue stream, instead of royalty payments, could have on the biotech name. Where’s the Beef? from November 16 One of Nadine Wong and her team’s readers asked if they could is difficult to get excited about Xoma. As of yet, there isn’t a ldiscuss Xoma (NADSAQ: XOMA) in November’s report. Although this is a twist from what Wong and her team usually do, this gives them a chance to point out that when it comes to investing biotech stocks, researching a company’s pipeline is one important aspect. For Xoma, it is encouraging to see the company has forged partnerships with Genentech, Chiron, Lexion Genetics and Millennium. This is important, as the company’s pipeline in general is thin, which means that the company will not be profitable for some time. Even royalties from Raptiva, which the company receives from Genentech, are not sufficient to cover expenses. The good news is that Genentech plans to expand Raptiva’s usage beyond psoriasis and intends to initiate a Phase II trial in the near future with Raptiva to treat atopic dermatitis, a disease affecting a total of 15 million U.S. patients, of whom 800,000 have severe disease. Provided that Raptiva gets approval from the FDA to expand its labeling, Xoma would receive extra royalty income. Then there is Xoma and Chiron’s anti-CD40 antibody in a Phase I trial to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The companies began a Phase I trial with anti-CD40 in multiple myeloma in October 2005. The Chiron collaboration has potential. Once clinical data materializes and if the anti-CD40 makes it through the regulatory process, Xoma would have a revenue stream instead of royalty payments and could become a driver of Xoma’s share price. it is difficult to get excited about Xoma. As of yet, there isn’t a lot of meat on the table.

To: bob zagorin who wrote (17208)	5/11/2006 8:47:19 PM
From: Edscharp	Respond to of 17367

Bob, Thanks of course, for the link. I finally found it on msg#17188, dated 1/18/06. For Xoma, the company continues to sign up licenses for its proprietary Bacterial Cell Expression (BCE) technology. Xoma also receives royalties on sales of psoriasis drug Raptiva at Genentech, and will receive royalties on two new products: Genentech's Lucentis (macular degeneration) and UCB's Cimzia (Crohn's disease) once they gain final approval. It's just that in light of today's event it's hard for me to come to the same conclusion you have, i.e. 'that the zacks report had it pretty much right'. But perhaps, this isn't the report you wanted to cite. As for the above blurb Cimzia and Lucentis have not yet been approved, and when and if they are approved Xoma only gets a lower single digit royalty, and only about a 5% royalty on raptiva. Indeed, one could argue that in the absence of that information Zacks' praise is a bit misleading. In any case, this is not what I call exciting news, then or now.