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: Maurice Winn who wrote (1518)	3/15/1998 6:40:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1762

Maurice, while you wait to see if Rick wants to add anything on your questions, here is something he wrote which is relevant: "Patient-specific therapies have always bombed. However, I am intrigued by the recent Stanford (Levy)/Vical license for anti-id in B lymphoma (similar to the early projects that almost took Idec down the drain). Note, also, that Levy's lab is doing the most advanced work with adjuvancy for DNA vaccines. Your brief analysis nails Vical..... very accurate and, IMO, insightful. There's plenty of time left for a decision." That was in response to Pseudobiologist who said, on the VDS thread: --------------------------------------------------------------- "To: Vector1 (4278 ) From: Pseudo Biologist Monday, Mar 9 1998 12:16PM EST Reply # of 4361 V1, the Scientific American issue on gene therapy is the June 1997 one. One of the articles is written by a Vical scientist. It is a very readable and useful series. I agree with your general analysis, but one has to realize that Vical itself is pursuing, and funding, a very small number of projects. I happen to have here a recent report (2/11/98) by Maykin Ho of Goldman Sachs. She sees their current cash position of $44 mill lasting for four years; Vical had a net loss of about $6 mill in 1997. The bad news, of course, is that Vical will not reap most of the rewards on genetic vaccine work as they have given a lot of the potential away to Merck, Pasteur Merieux, etc. My main concern is lack of tangible progress in the clinic. I am not too excited about the Allovectin and Leuvectin products; seriously doubt they will show impressive results. But I would love to be proven wrong." ------------------------------------------------------------- Patients' own immune systems use patient specific therapies all day every day, so they can't be all bad. It is just a matter of interfering with that system in the right way. Which might be quite a trick. Here is the June 1997 article: sciam.com Maurice