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 : VD's Model Portfolio & Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pseudo Biologist who wrote (6666)	5/17/1999 3:42:00 PM
From: mike head	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9719

Hi, PB. Better not let Richard H. comment on this! Remember a diatribe he held on anti-idiotypic MAb's a while back on the TTC thread <g>. Pax et Bonum, mch

To: Pseudo Biologist who wrote (6666)	5/17/1999 4:57:00 PM
From: Webhead	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 9719

With all due respect, CLTR may have a tougher row to hoe than the optimists on this board think. Not only does IDEC have an anti-CD20 antibody that works quite well with excellent and increasing market penetration, but their next generation of Rituxan (in P II, I believe) uses radioactive Yt or In (I forget which one) to deliver a theraputic dose of alpha without the heavier dose of gamma from CLTR's Iodine conjugate. Plus, with Genentech comarketing Rituxan with Herceptin, IDEC may have the competitive advantage. IMHO, CLTR faces a very tough, uphill battle to push aside rituxan before IDEC's next generation comes out. Disclaimer: I currently have no position in CLTR or IDEC. Ed