large instutions own this company and r not gonna jump on the merrill bandwagon - and notice that the key words in the release r "short term" meaning whatever they suspect is wrong might not be. Neutral in this sector and mkt means nothing... oversold!
"What about the ICD approval expected in March?" We know PFE sells toothpastes as well, but does that really matter?
You have to remember what put GDT shares on fire in the first place. It was STENT! Now all that charm and magic are gone! I do think that GDT will survive and eventually finds its way fighting back. But for short term, it's a DOG.
Safety endpoints are procedural complications, death (on the table), and MACE. Efficacy endpoints are the restenosis rates at various timepoints and TVR, etc. Guidant can comment on safety data because it is available immediately. Efficacy data is not.
I'm not saying that this is good news, but your facts are off.
PS - BSX has no case against GDT and Cook. They're desparate litigators. I don't think that Cook's product will compete with JNJ's, however.
"What about the rest of the GDT drug-eluting stent program? "
What about it? What does it amount to if Actinomycin D fails and Boston prevail in court with their claim to co-exclusive on Taxol. Nil is the answer.
Some posters seem to be focusing on the trial is blinded so the Merrill data can't be true. The trial is blinded not double blinded. If all groups have restenosis rates much greater than zero it matters not which is the control arm and which are the drug arms.
What about the ICD approval expected in March and the potential positive effect on revenues? What about the rest of the GDT drug-eluting stent program?
Does a rumour about one stent trial justify this drop in stock price? Seems to me GDT is looking pretty attractive at these prices and the market is overreacting. Comments?
Speculations? You are adorable.
Their press release gave just enough information to get them off the hook for any future class action suits, but still fools the naive investors until they unload their million shares.
In a trial like this, the safety endpoint and efficacy endpoint are usually the same - death, or time to death. When they anounced that the GDT stent is safe (did they say anecdotal?), or not many more deaths than placebo, they basically admitted it had no effect. Unless miracle happens, such as an accelarated deaths happen in the placebo treatment group in the next 3 months (Oh no! May God bless every patient!), GDT is a dead man walking!
Corporate lawyers always have "confidence" going into a case and want to see the case go to court (they have to get paid). However, I wouldn't equate confidence with success, as demonstrated over and over in our industry. As for Guidant, their recent case loss against St. Jude Medical (still awaiting to see if they appeal) is a case in point, where they had every confidence and "beat their chests" in describing how they were going to shutdown St. Jude for the since the case started several years ago. Don't know the strength of their position in the stent case, just don't want you to assume their cockiness automatically equates with a strong (and therefore successful) case. At these low prices, it still seems like a good buy.
You are exactly right. Without a polymer to give controlled dosing and hold the taxol the drug begins to wash off the surface of the stent as soon as you put it in the body. In the DELIVER trial, if the stent was not deployed in <5 minutes you had to remove it and throw it away! That will give doctors and patients a lot of confidence about the drug dosing with this product. Right!