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 : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Machaon who wrote (20624)	5/12/1998 9:58:00 PM
From: Andrew H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

>> Is the glass half full, or half empty? We could say that a significant percentage of the patients, 63%, did not have significant side effects. That's not bad. Plus, if they get good results from the 63% group, there is always the possibility of dosage adjustments, etc. as the product evolves, to deal with the 37% bad side effect problem.<< The point has been well made that the 37% was most likely not representative of the general target population. Only the most advanced cases were used. Actually though, 37% having to stop the treatment under normal circumstances would be pretty bad, IMO. >>I've got a question. When the FDA gives a product "fast track" designation, does that mean that the FDA has taken a fairly good look at the product?<< Its my understanding that fast tracking is often done for drugs that treat fatal or especially grisly diseases, especially when the treatment shows promise of helping individuals who could not previously be helped. Means that there is considerable urgency.

To: Machaon who wrote (20624)	5/12/1998 10:00:00 PM
From: bob zagorin	Respond to of 32384

BOP a shade lower today on lower volume than either of two previous days..still in yellow just below green. no particular significance, imo. doesn't seem like much of a reaction one way or other. my take, without trying to evaluate science, is that LGND is moving away from being a research biotech towards becoming a pharmaceutical company in the very near future. as such, they will be valued based on revenues and earnings not just research, trials etc. this makes sense to me and i would agree with RS analyst. i also have a question. might LGND use the Marathon facilities as additional manufacturing capacity for any of their other pipeline products?