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: Andrew H who wrote (4225)	10/22/1997 4:35:00 PM
From: Tharos	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17367

Andrew, One gets old and memory fades, but this is what I believe I remember. From the discussion it seemed to me that Xoma has a lot of pokers in the fire. The argument that if the meningitis trials successfully completed PIII then rBPI was a viable sepsis product with significant potential seemed logical to me. It also seems logical that Neuprex as a "sepsis" drug would have to complete some/any PIII test before anyone seriously payed attention. This based on E5 failure. Thus, if Castello was as savvy as his management of the firm indicated, then it was probably a good idea (that idea being all conjecture on this thread's discussor's part) that he was waiting for conclusive indications that Neuprex actually worked before entering into a final deal. This way he could maximize profit potential from the licence agreement. I am of course paraphrasing and writing with my understanding of the discussion. It was after this discussion that the subject died down/out. I chose the words "conclusive results from FDA" because, to me, successful PIII completition is as good as on the market.