Starting to gap the crittur around today - to the upside. I guess the 15 cent range for the day wasn't enough to afford him more than a Cosi sandwich...although those can be tasty.
Disclosure; Long and watching the bid / ask spread jump around with great amusement
<"neither ref. supports foolish's claim that BSX was the source of what he called BSX's underpowerd "slight" of Reality.">
Are you too obsessed with saving face to see the truth? Or do you really not understand the links which were given?
The second link, and passage offered, was:
<At a medical meeting last May, Paul LaViolette, senior vice president and group president of the cardiovascular group at Boston Scientific, said his company has received a lot of feedback from the marketplace on the trial, "and in general, the feedback that we are receiving is that the trial is characterized as bold, which is to say many physicians are highly doubtful that it will reach its endpoint [a 43% to 45% improvement in restenosis after six months for the Cypher vs. the Taxus device] and they believe it's actually risky for the sponsor.">
A) Paul LaViolette, as you know, is a Boston Scientific spokesperson.
B) To suggest that a trial will not meet it's primary enpoint is to suggest that it is underpowered. That's what underpowered means.
C) Although I disagree with your assessment of Trends-In-Medicine, they were not the source of this particular link.
neither ref. supports foolish's claim that BSX was the source of what he called BSX's underpowerd "slight" of Reality.
Trends is medicine is a known JNJ "friendly" in devices. They're the ones who said it... not BSX...
I had the opportunity to spend some time in the cath lab at our hospital today. Interestingly enough they deployed a Cypher into a patient with blockage in the medial portion of the LAD. They indicated to me that either DES is useful for deployment; they have contracts with both BSX and JNJ to use their product. In fact, most major interventional cardiologist departments have some contract to use both products. Although they used a Cypher this morning, I found out that Taxus is preferred for more complicated lesions and tortuous vessels, and it is EASIER TO DEPLOY. I asked Dr. G about the Taxus data, and he indicated they only care that DES stents are better than bare metal (for now).
I inquired about Maude issues as well. Yes there have been incidents where the balloon fails to deflate. However, most of the guide wires used at this hospital are manufactured by Cordis or Guidant. (Guidant wires were used in today's procedure). The pressure differential within the artery is the likely cause of non-deflation rather than the Paclitaxel coating. (REREAD THAT LINE) You can see similar statements in the Maude reports stating that the submitting cardiologist did not feel the issue was related to stent manufacture (for both Cypher and Taxus).
So how to interpret the MACE data? Well it would be important to realize how complicated the lesions were between the two patient groups. I would be interested in seeing the head-to-head data, my guess is that there will be no significant difference between the two products. There are articles pointing pro & con pertaining to Taxus restenosis, only more data will paint the picture.
After talking with the interventional cardiologists, it is safe to conlcude people who say Taxus is a POS have no idea what they are talking about...
A quick web search brought up these two articles (with links). I hope that helps you all with your little contest.
The first two patients have been enrolled in REALITY trial, a head-to-head comparison of Cypher and Taxus. Several experts believe this trial is a major risk for J&J. They are
dubious that it is sufficiently powered to show a statistically significant difference. One expert said, �If restenosis is 8%
with Cypher and 14% with Taxus, it can show a benefit to Cypher, but if the restenosis is 10% with Cypher and 12% with Taxus, J&J will be subsidizing an equivalency trial. The
only way J&J can win is on late loss.�
At a medical meeting last May, Paul LaViolette, senior vice president and group president of the cardiovascular group at Boston Scientific, said his company has received a lot of feedback from the marketplace on the trial, "and in general, the feedback that we are receiving is that the trial is characterized as bold, which is to say many physicians are highly doubtful that it will reach its endpoint [a 43% to 45% improvement in restenosis after six months for the Cypher vs. the Taxus device] and they believe it's actually risky for the sponsor."
<"give sources you dolt.... where, when, by whom ?">
Sorry REGTEK. As tempting as it may be to see how much of a fit you will throw, even that isn't worth listening through the last few CC Q&A's again. Be my guest if you wish to do so. Perhaps someone else who remembers such a reference could join in and save you the time.
I find your response / rejection of the underpowered comment really rather amusing. As a BSX long, do you really NOT believe Taxus to be near equivalent in efficacy to Cypher? If you were a little less eager to criticize others, you might manage to avoid painting yourself into so many corners.