Odds are pretty good for positive ASCO news June 3rd
Generally poster sessions for abstracts can go positive or negative, but seldom (actually I can't remember a time) where an Abstract was selected for an oral session and disappointed. Of course different oncologists may choose to interpret data presented differently, but the selection committee must have seen something they like in the Galaxy-1 abstract to select it for an oral slot.
Trying to reconcile that with an earlier post about the SNTA chart. I don't see how the 50DMA falls through the 200DMA. The fact that Synta is up for an Oral presentation is positive, I'd expect the data to follow, and the chart to reflect that. To me, we have a small buying window between now and Monday. I'd expect a steady climb into Friday, and a significant bounce Tuesday morning. Time will tell, but that's how I see it play out.
Institutional buying last quarter was also a positive sign. GLTA
sschawrtz, korking3 is 100% correct as neither ASCO nor SNTA knew what the data was when the abstract was submitted and subsequently chosen for an oral presentation. The reasons that SNTA is getting an oral presentation for Galaxy 1 is that second line NSCLC represents a large patient group and inhibition of HSP-90 was a very hot area of oncology about 5 years or so ago at Big Pharma before it was derailed by ocular and liver toxicity issues. Ganetespib doesn't have these types of toxicity issues, and the interim ESMO data was very promising. The ASCO update should contain data from about 50% more patients, so is pretty mature so it likely to give some more solid evidence one way of the other. Put that all together t means there is broad enough interest in the drug, and the cancer so it spells oral presentation. It sure as hell doesn't mean success.
There are a few issue that inexperienced investors make with regards to investments in companies featuring oncology drugs. First, an oral presentation at a meeting doesn't mean success in the trial for reasons I stated above. Second, getting a poster at a meeting doesn't mean a drug shows great, good or even okay results. It just means the company is presenting data from a trial, and is looking for expert input from others not associated with the trial. The FDA fast tracking a drug doesn't mean they are predicting success for a drug.
They have to have an oral presentation so they can explain why they went on a fishing expedition and got "good data" based only on a sub-population, when the data for the whole population (ITT) was bogus. They could never expect any real scientist to understand why they did what they did without at least trying to explain orally. If they presented it in poster form, there would be a huge crowd of doctors standing in front of it doubled-over and laughing so hard they would be crying.