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 : Xencor (XNCR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (24)	8/18/2014 4:51:52 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 136

Well, 5574 is behind Blinatomomab, which sports pretty promising results to date and breakthrough designation. Superficially, both recruit T-cells via CD19. We haven't seen much hard AE data from the completed 5574 P1/2 trial. They were waiting for a conference to publish, and it's been a while. Or have I missed it? Can't find anything concrete beyond the PRs from last October. Trying to get a handle on tox profile versus Blinatomomab. Should be different, and probably better than the Sanofi/IMGN effort, but would like to see more, as grade 3 tox seemed about equal to Blinatomomab. AZ's MEDI-551 also targets CD19 and binds via the same domain (FcyRIIIa), and is in about the same stage of clinical development as MOR208 (5574). Which makes me wonder about IP in this context. Probably not an issue, since one does it via afucolysation, and the other via deletions in Fc domain protein sequence. I'll get to concerns about 5871 in another post. TIA & Cheers, Tuck