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: Cheryl Galt who wrote (28491)	3/9/1999 4:35:00 PM
From: Machaon	Respond to of 32384

Cheryl, any thoughts on Nipent, SuperGen's drug which received orphan drug status for CTCL? Ligand's main reason for going after Targretin CTCL approval is for the off-label use, so cutting up the small CTCL pie doesn't really bother me, whether it takes sales from Targretin or ONTAK for CTCL. Anyone else have any input on this issue? My biggest fear is that Ligand will not get priority, "fast track" FDA consideration for Targretin/CTCL, because Nipent and ONTAK are already available treatments for CTCL. OTOH, Nipent and ONTAK are given intravenously and Targretin will be in capsule or gel form, so Targretin should be eligible for priority status, IMHO. Hey, what's for supper?

To: Cheryl Galt who wrote (28491)	3/10/1999 11:52:00 PM
From: Machaon	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 32384

<< " ... however, the return of Targretin rights will now permit us to rapidly generate revenues from distribution agreements pending in territories in which we will not directly market Targretin in oncology and dermatology" said Ligand Chairman, President and CEO David E. Robinson. >> HEY! I've got another positive spin based on Robinson's statement. Robinson is telling us that Ligand will be able to rapidly generate revenues thru distribution agreements. The only way that I can think that this can happen is if Ligand submits the NDA for Targretin capsules for CTCL, and then gets "priority" review. There is a good chance for "priority" review since there are only intravenous treatments for CTCL, and Targretin will be in capsule form, and would probably have safer side effects. After approval,possibly this year, any significant results from the existing advanced clinical trials can be used for "off label" sales, and there is a mess of trial results available! Is Robinson holding back clinical results of non CTCL diseases pending "fast track" approval for CTCL? Why would he do that? As you have pointed out, we're not going to see anything from the ABC trials until much later this year, if at all this year. So, IMHO, we've got to rule out any revenues from distribution agreements for this year for ABC. But, Targretin Gel and Capsules, Ligand's most important product (as Robinson points out), is also in advanced clinicals for psoriasis, advanced lung cancer, CTCL and KS. Also, trials of Targretin for actinic keratoses and ovarian and head and neck cancers have been completed. What am I missing? Am I nuts? Am I reading too much into his statement. Surely, Robinson is not referring to CTCL sales "thru distribution agreements pending in territories in which Ligand is not directly marketing Targretin in oncology and dermatology", right? To me, the words "rapidly generate revenues" doesn't mean CTCL sales. I'm changing my mind once more, based on this, and will look into accumulating some more LGND, hopefully at a little lower price. Anyway, this is how I feel today! <g> Regards, Bob

To: Cheryl Galt who wrote (28491)	3/11/1999 9:40:00 AM
From: Mudcat	Respond to of 32384

<We expect these opportunities plus potential milestone revenue from the second generation compounds will contribute to our march to profitability this year and next," > Cheryl, the way I interput this portion of Robinson's statement is that he is telling us that profitability is now moving from 1999 to late 2000 or 2001. "our march to profitability this year and next" means we are doing things (marching) this year and next to achieve profitability, but profitability will not be achieved until the march is over. Therefore, no profitability until early 2001. What do you think?