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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (251046)	5/21/2008 10:22:00 AM
From: goldworldnet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793881

The primary beneficiaries of aids research are intravenous drug users and the promiscuous, but everyone is susceptible to cancer. * * *

To: ManyMoose who wrote (251046)	5/21/2008 12:14:19 PM
From: Bridge Player	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793881

Re: Spending on cancer research. From an article in the 6/2/2008 issue of Forbes: forbes.com --------------------------------------------------- Proving that will be tough. Oncology was briefly dominated by small biotechs, but it's now a battleground for giants. AstraZeneca (nyse: AZN - news - people ), GlaxoSmithkline and Novartis are testing more than a dozen antitumor drugs each. Many of these are further along than Pfizer's. "There are hundreds of cancer drugs in development," says Glaxo cancer research head Paolo Paoletti. "The world is completely different." Like Pfizer, other companies are desperate to replace expiring patents. The drug industry's sales could soon shrink for the first time ever. It's doubtful that any of the anticipated new drugs will replenish Pfizer's revenues quickly. Pfizer's Sutent, used for kidney cancer, is a $600-million-a-year drug, the second-biggest cancer drug introduced since 2005. But even at that it would take 20 Sutents to make up the revenues of one Lipitor. (There are exceptions. Genentech's Avastin, used for colon, lung and breast cancers, brings in $2.3 billion annually.) Pfizer can also expect failures. A promising melanoma therapy was recently found wanting. Drugmakers are trying to increase their success rates by testing experimental drugs in a one-two punch against evil cells even before they've worked separately. "The faster we can move that along, the better," says Charles Baum, who leads the testing of Pfizer's cancer drugs. Merck cancer guru Stephen Friend is taking a similar approach but warns: "It's hard enough to do single drug discovery. You can't combine agents blindly." For Pfizer the important tests will come next year as its most advanced drugs take on Avastin. Results are due for Sutent in breast cancer, where Avastin slowed disease but did not prolong survival. Avastin failed in pancreatic cancer, but Pfizer hopes its Avastin-like pill, axitinib, will work. If one or both of those bets pay off, investors might return to Pfizer's beaten-down shares. A few more failures could scare them away for a long time. Says Nicholson, "It's up to us to drive growth, and we think we've got an outstanding chance to do that." ----------------------------------------------------------- The drug industry is spending many billions on cancer research. Personally, I don't believe it would be beneficial to have additional government spending also. I'd much rather have it done by private industry. Obviously a downside is that the research spending does drive up the cost of drugs, a big factor in health care costs.