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 : Agouron Pharmaceuticals (AGPH) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oliver & Co who wrote (3739)	2/5/1998 12:48:00 AM
From: Peter Singleton	Respond to of 6136

JLL, Izzy, You guys are both in the field. What's your opinion of Fortovase? JLL, besides the fact many patients have been exposed to SQV ... what about for new patients? Is the number of pills a material issue? How about tolerability ... it looks about the same as Viracept, and better than Crix and Norvir. Am I right on this? What about cross resistance? Any other issues? I'd sure feel more comfortable as an AGPH shareholder if you guys could give me a credible argument from the point of view of a prescribing physician why you feel Viracept remains the class of the field ... : ) but either way, I'd appreciate your opinion. Peter

To: Oliver & Co who wrote (3739)	2/6/1998 1:21:00 AM
From: billkirn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6136

Oliver&Co, John, Margie: An article in the SF Chronicle pageA7 2/5/98 indicated that the rumors of "Buffalo Hump" and "Protease Paunch" symptoms are beginning to be documented..... Chemicals essential to metabolism that resembled the portion of HIV protease targeted by the drugs, including an LDL-Cholesterol receptor on liver cells. If the HIV drugs were to damage the receptor, he suggested, the results would be lipid absorption problems in the liver. Has any DR. on this thread noticed this symptom emerging with their patients? Is this something to be concerned about as protease inhibitor usage continues? Could this be a limitation on usage of protease inhibitors? Could this mean that these drugs should not be used until absolutely needed, rather than immediately after detection of HIV. Apparently only 21 cases have been sent to the FDA for review so far. I think we need to keep track of this issue, as it might seriously impact the use of Protease Inhibitors in the future. I would appreciate any comments and observations on this subject. Thanks Bill