Wed, Jul 23, 2014, 10:38 AM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 5 hrs 22 mins

Recent

% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • batzem batzem Feb 6, 2008 4:50 PM Flag

    Low volume

    Tron thanks for the link a great report. So much for the analsyts not doing their homework. To paraphrase Gale Sayers, "When you hit your knees tonight pray for MP 470 and decent EORTC survival data. Would not like to wait another 5 years to see a properly designed trial.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Well I have to agree with Batzem. Just read this report and it's an eye opener and would of been useful, years ago. But they give Dacogen a 20% chance to beat the survival number and 30% chance it won't. The less cycles and capping the cycles at 8 will probably affect this trial. They did state that at 6 cycles at 6 wk intervals would be equal to average Vidaza 9 cycles.


      Do the math:

      6 cycles x 6 weeks = 36 weeks dacogen
      9 cycles x 4 weeks = 36 weeks Vidaza


      The earlier trials of Dacogen used 1-3 cycles and a lot of measuring survival is based against some patients only receiving one cycle in approved trial. We have to hope that because of potency that the benefits continue. But Manuso has stated that the longer in the blood stream the better these drugs work and we all know that these drugs only work for a short period. So additional cycles of vidaza may give it the advantage.


      Why did Tim hint at some adjustment by investigators may of been made? Is this just more B/S by SUPG or could there be some truth to this. I just hope that maybe they saw that 8 cycles would add more benefits. This would help:

      8 cycles x 6wks = 48 Weeks


      Here's my dumb question and I want to make sure I thought this through correctly.

      Vidaza showed a survival to 24 months which is 104 weeks, right? Well if they took this stuff for 36 weeks on average and lived some 68 weeks after this? What am I missing here. Am I looking at it wrong?

      • 2 Replies to billyteex1
      • Interesting read. My only question is why 50/50 if Dacogen is equal or better? It is 50/50 right now. I think if Dacogen shows equal or better, with the benefits of efficacy and the better treatment schedule this would be a big benefit. Plus, as the report mentions, that despite the current survival data, physicians feel Dacogen is the better drug. If EORTC is equal or better, why not a 70/30 split in favor of Dacogen? That is what the report gives Vidaza for a more favorable outcome with a positive result. JNJ-Cilag vs CELG in Europe and Esai vs CELG in Asia. Who benefits?

        I have maintained all along this is a speculative stock with hug upside vs great risk. I thought ADOPT would give WallStreet some answers. I was wrong. Although initial IMS data may seem that doctors were more impressed with Dacogen that Vidaza at ASH. Will see in the upcoming months. EORTC is the determination. Until then, stay tuned. But if IMS is any indication (continuing market approval of Dacogen despite the Vidaza Survival Study which always gets left out of these reports) then a positive survival study should wake people up to what the Doctors are already recommending to their MDS patients.

      • Billy,

        Would it work this way:

        Vidaza cycles on it a week +4 weeks off and then repeat
        (total cycle is 5 weeks)

        Then math is 9 cycles x 5 wks =45 wks Vidaza



        Dacogen cycle 3 days on + 6 weeks off
        (Total cycle is 6 wks + 3days)

        Then math is 6 X 6 wks 3 days= 36 wks + 18 days or 38.5 wks

 
ASTX
8.4950.000(0.00%)Oct 10 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.