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: scaram(o)uche who wrote (4607)	6/29/1998 3:58:00 PM
From: margie	Respond to of 6136

Spare me the protease-sparing regimens when they start off with 34 patients in the group, are down to 27 patients at 16 weeks and don't bother to report the number of patients that remain at 24 weeks; anywhere from 4-17 patients are left. Levin reported data for 4 (FOUR) patients at 24 weeks. It does sound good, doesn't it, if Sustiva+AZT+3TC brings viral loads to below detectable levels in 95% of subjects. At 24 weeks; one report says there were 20-21 patients in each group but the NATAP report gives data for only 4 patients at 24 weeks. And 4/4 patients were <40 copies and 3/4 were <1 copies. At 16 weeks, 67% were <40 copies or 18/27 59% were <1 copy or 16/27 Even if they report 15-20 patients at 24 weeks, shouldn't it be 15/34? Where did all the patients go? I posted a reference to this study above, natap.org And if that is the data they are reporting check out the data yourself. Base RNA Base CD4 Group A= Placebo + AZT+3TC n=33 45,700 395 Group B=EFV-200 mg +AZT+3TC n=34 64,500 329 Group C=EFV-400 mg +AZT+3TC n=34 57.540 359 Group D=EFV-600 mg +AZT+3TC n=36 43,600 388 At 16 weeks, EFV+IDV was added to Group A. AT 16 weeks, B+C were increased to 600 EFV Those who started in D but were not undetectable, had IDV+d4T added. At 24 weeks, the premature discontinuation numbers were A=5; B=6; C=7=D=8. Increase in CD4 : Week 24 Mean RNA Viral load decrease Group A +87 -1.65 log Group D +110 -1.9 log At the Natap site, Jay Levin's first day report on Geneva mentions a study where nnrti's were compared to regimens with protease inhibitors. There was less virus in the lymph nodes in the protease group. Why don't they give the number of patients? I haven't even looked at the protease sparing hydroxyurea group but I would not be too surprised to see that data was reported in a similar fashion, because from what I have heard, hydroxyurea is not supposed to do much good certainly without a pi nor in more advanced cases.