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: billkirn who wrote (4539)	6/22/1998 1:16:00 AM
From: John Metcalf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6136

Slow down, Bill -:) Not much can be said about a Phase I trial, of which the results were just announced. There were a number of different doses and trial arms, administered to people with advanced cancers. The purpose of the trial was to demonstrate safety, and to gather information on response to the drug at various doses. Since AG3340 inhibits vascularization of tumors, the response of people whose tumors had grown may not mean much, because they already had blood supply to the tumors. It is possible that AG 3340 will have greater effect earlier in the disease process, as well as in combination with chemotherapeutic agents. Later trials will clarify efficacy, in earlier disease stages, at optimal dosages, in the best combinations. Efficacy conclusions from a Phase I trial are premature.

To: billkirn who wrote (4539)	6/22/1998 1:25:00 AM
From: Peter Singleton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6136

Bill, why do you say AG3340 may not be strong enough to warrant continued development? Is it based on the results published last week? While I agree with you the efficacy data sounds underwhelming on the face of things, remember this is PI data, and it's hard to tell much, and the data are sketchy in any event. If you think MMPs are a good target for a cancer drug (it appears they may be), then I think 3340 has a chance at being a successful drug. I believe that it does what AGPH says it does, which is inhibit those MMPs implicated in cancer much more so than those MMPs which perform essential house-keeping functions. Another question is how risky is the strategy to cut to PII/III from PI? It worked with Viracept, but is that any predictor here? I don't know. I think they have an intelligently designed trial plan, and they believe they have selected the right dose range ... and their goal would be to get a 50% increase in survival time with terminal patients. If, for example, in NSCLC patients, if the chemo patients alone live 6 months, will chemo + AG3340 (which doesn't add significant toxicity) get 9 months? Peter