Thu, Jul 10, 2014, 3:52 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 8 mins.

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

  • <<...over 90% survive Phase III once they
    have advanced that far.>>

    What do you
    mean by "survive PIII?" Do you mean that they advance
    to NDA, or that they are ultimately approved and
    marketed?

    My recolection (disclaimer: memory
    failing, and am too lazy to look it up) is that only about
    40% of the drugs that complete PII ever make it to
    market. Am I _that_ mistaken? (BTW, all these statistics
    merely reflect an average; much depends on how well the
    specific PII is designed.)

    Having said this, I am
    not hostile to SUPG. I actually like this company
    (more or less...) I like the SPTA take-over. And if the
    PII 9-nc pancreatic results can be taken at face
    value, SUPG is a superb bargain -- which begs the
    question, "Can they?"

    Just my $0.02,
    RB

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • One quick question...in your post of February 13,
      you stated that semantics can play a part in how a
      study is allowed to be perceived..you even gave an
      exampe of how you can say .."of those responding to RFS
      2000....and indicated that this is not the same as the entire
      sample....and I agree with you there is a difference...I would
      want to know how everyone taking RFS 2000 was
      doing...not just those "responding" to the
      drug....

      Has anyone asked the question...or was this just
      semantics...

      By the way you did leave out ONE very important fact
      in that press release you refered to...
      And that
      was that two patients being treated with RFS 2000
      went into complete remission. I, like you, tend to
      disbeleive people and tend to lose credibility in them when
      they play games with semantics and pick and chose only
      the facts they want you to hear.... You seem to be as
      guilty as the company you blame for doing the exact same
      thing...

      And anyone who says they are not shorting a stock is
      usually shorting the stock....IMHO...

      Good luck to
      the longs....

    • Here is crafty747 wrote:

      >>>do
      you have any idea how long it takes to get things
      published. i know somebody has pointed this out
      before.<<<

      My friend, it is sure take time for a paper to be
      published. As short as one month, as long as, may be two
      years, especially the data is messy and does NOT make a
      lot of sense.

      Hey the phase 1 trial of RFS
      2000 was publish in 1996. So I will take your argument
      that it takes time to publish. Then the phase 1 must
      have been concluded in 1995. WHY it takes so long to
      conclude a phase 2 trial while some of you actualy believe
      that the company can conclude the phase 3 trial in SIX
      months?

      Anyone see anything here?

    • You pose the question, "P.S. Call Yahoo and ask
      if PMKK1 learned a lesson the hard way. If you are
      not an investor , why risk so much for nothing?"


      It's not hard to imagine someone wanting to be helpful
      to another person even if he had no equity in the
      problem at hand. Usually that persons tone of
      communication is redolent of concern and affection for his
      fellow. Looking over genehunter's communications, with
      all the SHOUTING, the hostility, the frequency, the
      urgency, the size of the posts, I am convinced that
      genehunter is not one of those good samaritans. I think he
      is one of those guys that tries to pull a little
      emotional support for an underinflated sense of self esteem
      by being irritating and confrontational on the net.
      The more responses he gets, the better he feels. So,
      everyone, let's give genehunter the emotional support he
      needs so that eventually he'll feel good enough about
      himself to go away.
      Les

    • While this lively debate has been fun, it seems
      to have gone absolutely nowhere in oh the last 80
      messages or so. It is getting old don't you
      think.

      From your last post, and many others you are
      incredibly concerned about why the Phase II results are not
      in a peer reviewed journal. You
      write:

      "....none in human data, in peer reviewed publications, had
      demonstrated the efficacy for the treatment of any type of
      cancers, including pancreatic cancer, as judged by
      scientific statistical significant level."

      First, do
      you have any idea how long it takes to get things
      published. i know somebody has pointed this out before.
      Recall that last May, the INTERIM results were updated
      in the press release. Do you really believe they
      should waste their time trying to publish interim
      results? That is like doing half an experiment and trying
      to get it published. And even if they had been
      trying sense May, do you actually think it would be in
      print yet? Take a valium my friend. The trial ain't
      over till its over, and unfortunately, we all know
      what that means.

      Further, do you actually
      think that just because it is published that it would
      meet your strict criteria above? You obviously haven't
      been reading the lit.

      I believe the data you
      want (to "demonstrated the efficacy for the
      treatment... as judged by scientific statistical significant
      level.") is called a Phase III trial. True, phase II
      sometimes generate decent p values, but indeed the point is
      to get proof of concept and perhaps some safety and
      dosing information.

      Basically it seems that what
      you want is for the company to guarantee that the
      experimental drug works. Guess, what that is not there job. As
      investors it is our job to look at what data is available
      and determine if WE think it is worth investing.


      Have you read the phase III clinical trial results for
      Gemzar? Why don't you start with those and then think
      about the implications.

    • Please go back and re-read each of your posts.
      Then re-read the American Eco press release. IMO you
      have crossed the line between opinion and
      fact.


      Good luck.

      P.S. Call Yahoo and ask if PMKK1
      learned a lesson the hard way. If you are not an investor
      , why risk so much for nothing?

    • Sir,

      You need to read any of my statements
      in their respective context.

      By the way, how
      do you judge Clinton's statements?

      Please
      read my posts in their context and make sensible
      accessments.

      Genehunter

    • My friend, when I wrote these posts, I do not
      expect anybody to judge them as a manuscript submitted
      for the publication in Science.
      Let me finish that
      sentense:

      ....none in human data, in peer reviewed
      publications, had demonstrated the efficacy for the treatment
      of any type of cancers, including pancreatic cancer,
      as judged by scientific statistical significant
      level.

      Thank you for giving me the opportunity to finish the
      sentense.

      Genehunter

    • My friend , why would I point out your faults. I
      will forward the information to the company
      tomorrow.
      If you feel confident ,keep posting. Just think of
      the poor sap ,who was sued by American Eco.
      Good
      luck.

      P.S. Joe R is not a Scientist ?

    • "... RFS2000, regardless "shape" or "form",
      however, none in human data."

      Fractured sentence
      structure notwithstanding, am I missing something here,
      genehunter6p ? Are you saying no 9-nitrocamptothecin data for
      human trials exists ?

    • My friend, can you help me to find out what
      statement I made in my message board posts (In this or any
      other thread) is not ACCURATE, or FALSE?

      I would
      appreciate if you can find any false staement in my
      post.

      When you make any such claim, please be specific and
      accurate!

      Thank you!

    • View More Messages
 
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.