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 (4936)	11/29/1997 2:53:00 PM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 17367

Andy, thanks what you say is logical. When I went back to the Lancet article on use of protein C and haemodialfiltration I do believe I found at least an indication of amputation rates in historical data. These were 50 and 75% even when treated with "C" or haem. alone. While 2/13 = 15.3% trial numbers leave problems with significance for the combined trial using C and filtration. 7/25 = 28% for Xoma in P II. Is better than what I now think historical rate might be. Willing to change my mind as I may not be understanding the data. BTW Duncan makes big point about infusion being given 4+ hours after adminstration of antibiotics and saying in my words that by then the cascade would have done its damage. This should be easy to refute if indeed it is refutable. I do hope that Giroir or Kirsch or XOMA will say something. Having invited people who might not think XOMA is a good buy to post here I obviously think controversy can be of value. A public dispute about BPI could be a good thing especialy if P III works out.