new updates sound promising. also, the car t contingent had a big hiccup this weekend which shows that those guys are still way way off from delivering imo. adc might not have the future tech appeal like it used to, but it works, and the newer generation linkers sound solid. anything below 40 is a great accumulation point. if this company doesnt reach 10 + billion ill be danged.
Like clockwork, SGEN reports quarterly results and it sells off big then for no other reason it recovers a few days later. The same thing happened upon approval of ADCETRIS. The only thing that changes is the percent of the selloff. In the meantime the golden age moves ever closer. Abbvie purchase of that other ADC company that most people had never heard of with no approved drugs and a single PIII candidate offers a pretty good metric to gage what BB could be asking for SGEN. Certainly 30 percent of the lung cancer market is for now a larger opportunity than the restricted markets that Adcetris is currently approved for but in 18-24 months approval for frontline should be in the bag and with progression of the huge pipeline the asking price should scale pretty large. The wait is certainly rocky but if you are long SGEN just stay focused on the prize.
Hard to imagine that the phase 1 extended follow-up study data on SGN 33A is not "encouraging" as they are scheduled for an oral presentation in Copenhagen next month and are beginning a phase 3 registrational study as announced today .
Patients! And good luck to all.
IFN-gamma and CCL2 cooperate to redirect tumor-infiltrating monocytes to degrade fibrosis and enhance chemotherapy efficacy in pancreatic carcinoma, Cancer Discovery (2016).
Atp, thanks for your referral to that very interesting video. In response to the video one of the comments by a physician was the following:
"I have been discussing biological therapy as the future for oncology since my residency and especially during my Fellowship at Duke Cancer Center in the late 1980s. Antibody based therapy in particular has always seemed to me to have the greatest potential. With clinical studies like this ( as per Dr. Cheson ) and all the other recent findings from studies on solid tumors, it appears certain that Monoclonal Antibodies will increasingly supplant older, cytotoxic chemotherapy. Over the next 5-10 years, there will be an accelerated rise in the use of antibody treatment and a corresponding decline in the use of chemotherapy. I am reminded of what Dr Robert Oldham said to me in 1983, " Biological Therapy will become the Fourth Modality for the treatment of neoplastic diseases."
There is an interesting video by Bruce Cheson at Georgetown Cancer center regarding Nivolumab and brentuximab. You can probably view it after googling his name. Apparently he has written a protocol combining the 2 drugs to treat frontline HL and it has been approved by the FDA and seeking enrollment at some major sites. Dr. Cheson is big on seeking to eliminate systemic chemo drugs and appeared very excited about the prospects of combining these two agents.
As to yesterdays news, Adcetris does have a failure rate and it is great to try other alternatives should patients fail with Adcetris, but Adcetris ' success rate to my eyes is superior to nivo or pembro. I think the trials mentioning followup to prior Adcetris treatment is more in recognition that it is the gold standard and will be frontline. I haven't seen anything shown to be more effective. But if these PD-!'s can provide some success to some of the patients that do fail, all the best. And the combo trials may have even greater results.
In comparing the ASH 2015 abstract to the abstract to be presented in June during the conference in Copenhagen, the treated patients has slightly more than doubled. 24 reported in December, 53 in the recent abstract, Probably more data will be included in the oral presentation. By the way, at the ADC world conference in San Diego coming up this fall Drachman from SGEN is delivering the keynote address to the conf. on 33A.
Back to this recent abstract. In Dec. the Cr/CRi rate was 65%, now after 53 pts. the CR/CRi/PR rate is 76%. While this new data has added in PR , only 1 pt. was listed as a PR, all the rest were CR/CRi.. Additionally 42% were MRD negative. 30 and 60 day mortality was still very low and still no dose limiting toxicities.
So just comparing abstracts the data is holding up.
One other thing, since this approval implies that Adcetris must be tried first, there is some speculation a pharma the size of BMY could have the desire to secure earlier lines of treatment thru acquisition rather than being content with simply being the final hope.
Combining selective targeting (MAB guided chemo, Adcetris as example) and preventative (Vaccine like Juno, Kite, Unum) therapies is most likely to be the beginning of the end for cancer. Targeted therapy destroys what is already there and vaccination prevents recurrence. Time will tell but at this juncture it is a compelling argument.
No form 4. Looks like Bakers are not the cause of price surge and up volume. with similar action in acad and others, maybe tide has turned in biotechs. Especially SGEN and other baker holdings! Hopefully optimistic.
Some institutions are under pressure to perform in the short-term...so anything that may linger on the sidelines for a while is not where they want to be.
Of course, I can share with you from personal experience, by the time the skies clear, the stocks will already have moved up substantially. That's just human nature to wait until all issues are resolved but, by then, the share prices will already have moved in anticipation of that resolution.
I have a large position in SGEN...and do not wish to play the Wall Street games of trying to time the ups and downs. My strategy is and has been in place for many, many years and, while occasionally painful, swimming against the Wall Street tide and the analyst community has proven for me to be a better way to go than jumping into the pool with the crowd.
Thanks W1. They only posted after I looked at their website. Anyway as mentioned this is for relapsed. Adcetris is in process of redefining frontline treatment. This approval was widely expected.
Also SGEN has combo trials with Opdivo ongoing also. Think stock went up today because the BB's were buying. SGEN hopefully will be a prime takeover candidate in not too distant future. Good Luck.
A few institutions have come to the conclusion (erroneously so, in my book) that bio companies will never be allowed to recapture their R & D investment in their pipelines....that the big hand og Government will shut them out....In fact, patients will demand and the market will allow bios to be "paid" for bringing to the market the many life-saving and life-extending drugs in their labs.
What we are seeing is a typical market over-reaction to politicians screaming about the high cost of drugs. That screaming will go away after the election when reality will once again dominate.
To me, this is an excellent time to be accumulating selected bios with a clear pipeline and a pathway to profitability. I think, for instance, that The Bakers know this regarding SGEN and are riding this hiccup out...and so am I. If we get a further dip/correction, I will become a buyer in both SGEN and in the other key players in the group.
The SGEN end game, to me, still appears to be a substantial buyout. When? Anyone's guess...but I can wait.
That would not be a good use of cash on hand. With the failure of Rintega (very disappointing first and foremost because it leaves a huge need still unmet for GBM) the remaining pipeline is still early and requires lot's of cash to evolve. SGEN already has a huge pipeline with great promises so it is best to use available resources to develop develop them and leave the also promising CLDX pipeline for someone else with deeper pockets to husband through. I'm still shaking my head for how this Rintega turn of events. How does a remarkable PII success story turn into failure in a larger trial with better cohorts? Was PII a hoax? If not then what makes the difference? Why is mgt so quick to abandon the trial even before reanalizing the data. Too many unanswered questions. I have a small investment in CLDX (a lot smaller now) but I will not be adding to it until those questions can be answered.
Nope...He just followed and exaggerated an existing trend. Even without his dismal example, the cost of drugs has been progressively jacked up.
In the generics that older folks depend on, it's been dizzying.
For example , i take one of the oldest synthetic drugs to stay alive. It used to cost $9 a month. Now it's well over 4 times that amount.
Retired folks are #$%$ about that , and they vote. Politicians have to pay attention.
Echelon1 is the pacing item here because approval for frontline HL will be the gateway for the $1billion addressable market for NA and anoter $ 3 billion for ROW (for which by then SGEN will be collecting mid 20 percent royalties : I.e. net profit to bottom line). If SGEN remains independent until then, the potential buyers will also be able to see the white of the eyes of Echelon2 and the PI/PII results of several of the others in the pipe discussed at the CC and BB will be able to get a price well north of $ 20 billion MC. My guess is that a deal will be struck sooner than that (close to first H'17) for a price in the vicinity of $ 15 billion +/- 3 billions because at the higher valuations that can be achieved later, the field of potential acquirers is somewhat reduced which would limit competition. There is always the chance that SGEN remains independent and achieves MC above these levels as an independent entity but that does not fit the past model for BB. Being that this is biotech, investors must always be mindful that lightning can strike at any time and turn it all into a pile of ashes but barring anything in that scale ( most unlikely in our case because Adcetris has already been in the market 5 years ) we are on target for a significant payday even if the schedule has now slipped a bit from my original expectations.
With all of the trials in the pipe, there is no way to forecast anything that far out. All that can be done is to get a number that is very subjective and highly qualified. If everything coming out of the trials is positive you are looking on a MC between $20 and $25 billions, if everything fails you are looking on
an MC between 0.5- $2 billions. For anything between MC will be proportionally between these 2 ranges. Most probable outcome is around the $15-18 bazillion mark but be advised that on the subjective end I'm admittedly over invested in SGEN and objectively I do not work for GS, so I have no knowledge of what is really going to happen.
It appears from the grayed out (ignored) original post that you are responding to the multi-aliased, thinking-challenged, only-shows-up-on-red-days troll known here under the following names: fstout57/rickarooski/quadhole/quadhole1/mauihope/smelky/etc. His elevator never reaches the top floor. Take it from board veterans: It's really better not to feed the troll.
With sgen, always held a large core, about 2/3 of my maximum sgen holdings. The other one third I traded in and out as it rotated up and down within a given channel. Did a lot of that in the early years when you could quickly pick up a couple of dollars on a lower PPS on 10k or 20k shares in a week. Haven't done it in recent couple of years as its no longer worth it from my perspective. Now just holding for the Big Bang - it's all house money at this point.
With acad, haven't traded it as it was not as predictable, again from my perspective. Sold some of my original core. The rest holding again for the Big Bang.
Overall, stayed substantially in both because I 've felt they offered the best risk/reward at any given point in time. I'm not a fan of taking profits just because of a good run. To me, it's always what the best investment choice for today and tomorrow, not what happened yesterday.