SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Biotech Derivatives -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: sim1 who wrote (76)4/9/1999 7:23:00 PM
From: scaram(o)uche  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 555
 
Stuart:

Thanks!

OK, if this is correct, it looks like big days on both Sunday (ovarian, pancreatic) and Tuesday (rhabdo). The data that is most impressive, IMO and from the abstracts, is that due on Tuesday. However, the xenograft data that is to be presented on Sunday represents "big market" models. I had hoped to review the abstracts in the thread by now, but never got around to it. I suspect that all the thread regulars have been keeping their mouths shut and buying.

For those who have not looked at the abstracts, they include 100% inhibition of tumor growth for both rhabdo (RH30) and pancreatic. Controls are Taxol for ovarian, Gemcitabine for pancreatic, and Cisplatin for rhabdo. The 114 results make the controls look silly.

The data seems to be presented in a conservative fashion, as one table indicates eight of nine partial responses and no complete responses for rhabdo RH1 where the growth inhibition is listed as 99%.

That's the eye-grabbing stuff. The mechanistic studies and work with chemoresistant tumors is even more impressive, IMO. Dr. Kelner seems to still be moving and shaking, and I'm interested in hearing more about the newer derivatives of illudin (or, formally, acylfulvene??).

But.... the observation that really blew me away was that there would be a poster on phase II prostate at ASCO.

Rick



To: sim1 who wrote (76)4/9/1999 11:31:00 PM
From: Mike McFarland  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 555
 
"Cytotoxic effects of MGI 114 are independent
of tumor suppressor gene p53 and p21 expression."


Is that important for lung cancer--is the mutation
throughout lung tissue and not just in the tumor?

(is that the right question?)