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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert S. who wrote (8481)	1/25/1999 6:51:00 PM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 17367

RobertS, you are indeed right. It was and is a positive statement. seems like some did not understand why it was positive. Please help them understand! While not excluding the fact that Neuprex might not prove to have efficacy the extension of the trials in and of itself is not proof of lack of efficacy. Indeed, as i have consistently said, extension, if there is a targeted level of mortality, means that that target was not reached within the timeframe various parties thought it be reached. One factor that would be causative would be efficacy of Neuprex. This is the good news. Does that mean Neuprex is working? No because the death rate could have been lower than expected due to faster and better treatment in both groups, even giving allowance for a must read Glascow scale reading of 8. The data being more robust, is good news because rather than Centoxic experience we will have a better opportunity to see Neuprex worked or did not. Wonder why, others, not you, that object so much to a specific level of deaths, did not object to a reading of 8 on the Glascow scale, rather than a much lower level before treatment was begun?