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 : IDPH--Positive preliminary results for pivotal trial of ID -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pseudo Biologist who wrote (1512)	3/9/1998 2:20:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 1762

PB, It seemed to me that if Rituxan makes you susceptible to tuberculosis due to an absence of B-cells I suppose, then cyclophosphamide and the others which take neutrophils and other stuff down to near zero must have the same problem. I really question the tuberculosis risk with Rituxan. Not being a doctor, I have to find the logical gaps after the event all too often. Which there are all too many of. The nuking with Iodine 131 or Yttrium 90 is hopelessly inaccurate. Like nuking Baghdad to get Saddam. Still, it's better than blowing up everything else as well, which is the high voltage xray approach. Xrays definitely kill stuff! You get a line across your cheek where the hair doesn't grow due to cellular destruction by Xrays. I really don't think the hair follicles are implicated in lymphoma. Nor the thyroid, blood vessels supplying teeth etc. CHOP kills off plenty too! It was amazing to see how fast hair regrows once the CHOP has worn off. Over a period of 3 days - from skin smooth to hedgehog style. Rituxan is a very good start on the road to accurately targeted lymphoma cells. But killing all the B-cells sounds like a bad plan. Collateral damage from I131 attached to CD20s, necrotic tissue or other markers is a half way house as well. The Malaghan approach seems pretty good to me. Handling individuals has always been expensive, but with modern technology such as gene chip arrays and all the other whiz bang gear becoming available, it makes sense to individually tailor things. So Rituxan and other monoclonal antibodies probably have a short half-life in cancer treatment. But at least funds from those will enable better developments. Maybe IDEC or somebody should offer to buy out the Malaghan Institute, or contract with them for patent development, pour in a lot of $$$ and make it happen faster. IDEC with its market lead with Rituxan has a chance to become the lymphoma capital of the world. Maurice