A veteran Wall Street biotech investor with his negative thesis for cabozantinib. Paints a bleak outlook for Cabo. And too late, "to the show;" for Prostrate. "I don't expect the company to have data until the first half of 2015 at the earliest, and that assumes a lightning-fast enrollment pace and an early halt for efficacy. How likely is it that the cabo trial can be halted early for efficacy? Not so much because cabo has yet to show any survival benefit to date."
I think the truth is that cancer drugs don't compete with each other. Most of the time, patients try all kinds of drugs. Those drugs will fail in the end. It is nice to be first line so the payback is quicker. However, as long as the drug works, it has a place. Even the diabetes market can accommodate a few drugs.
I believe you are absolutely on track here, and I encourage you to look comprehensively at the targeted genomic research currently being done by ILMN, AFFY, SQNM, and GNOM.
As individuated & personalized disease conditions, mutated resistances, and genetic abnormalities are recognized via these quickly evolving technologies...so are the "best" targeted therapeutics constantly being recognized for their intrinsic value. It's a growing, evolving storyline.
And..best of all...
Cabo's clear-cut clinical differentiation makes it a wonderful target for these developing biometric sciences. Cabo's activity - being not just beneficial, but also unique - makes it a wonderful research tool...if not a potentially efficaceous & effective treatment regimen. We are on the edge of a revolution in cancer therapy, and the gene sequencing technologies will need & feed the targeted approaches.
The term "unprecedented" was used during presentations of the original bone scan effects. It has been used on numerous occasions since to describe the drugs activity. This is one term you would recognize had you been watching since the summer/fall of 2010.
As for a low stock price being good, disagree. Perhaps if you personally are accumulating, but eventually EXEL is going to need to raise capital to fund the Cabo franchise development, a low PPS makes that a more dilutive process.
In response to " if the bone scans are truly indicating a rollback of metasticization, the upside on shares is almost surely more than 100% and probably closer to 1000%", the true value is likely somewhere inbetween. The bone effects are being accepted as real, yet columnists like Adam F choose to ignore them completely. ASCO should provide more compelling data and an update on the MTC NDA is growing near (Q2).
I think EXEL will be taken out sooner than later. The world of cancer treatments is evolving into targeted/combination therapies. Cabo will be a valuable part of that world.
Ultimatelly the fortunes of this company are going to rise or fall on with the efficacy of cabo. If the frug is a blockbuster, then all the compelling negative press will have created an artificially low stock price. Unless you are on the margin, such an outcome is all for the good. Oddly, your statement that single most unprecedented is a quote from one of the PhDs studying cabo is a bit unsettling. It is my experience that people use over-the-top descriptions, when objective evidence is inadequate. Fortunately, a google search of that phrase only turns up your post and a few other hyperbolic references.
The way I see it, the market cap on this company is $670 million. They have $332 million in cash and cash equivalents, marketable securities and long-term investments. Net out these funds and the company is valued at less than $3 a share. Relative to the prospects of cabo, this valuation seems low even if you account for the problems described by Feuerstein. The downside from here is zero and if Feuerstein's source is to believed, this is the most likelye outcome. On the other hand, if the bone scans are truly indicating a rollback of metasticization, the upside on shares is almost surely more than 100% and probably closer to 1000%. In that scenario, the relative risk seems to weigh pretty heavily on those betting against the company. EXEL seems to be setting up for a binary event, where the shorts will prevail or thay will lose their shorts in a mad rush to get out of their positions.
So you thought the article was balanced? I completely support hearing a balanced analysis. IMO thats a long way from what was presented. Adam F mentions a tweet by "an amateur" biotech investor (without providing the bull case) and uses that as an excuse to deliver a one sided bear case. Not helpful to those who don't understand the whole picture. And the adjectives I used in my Yahoo post (unlike the article in The Street) are the same adjectives used by the lead scientists studying this drug. Wonder who has more credibility? An anonymous "veteran wall street biotech investor", or those with PHD's leading the studies?
Can Bernie or Oncodoc elaborate a little on why in the Street article, the investor said Cabo is inferior to Alpharadin or Zytiga if you know? I don't think there are data to support that statement.
Also There is no data about OS for Cabo so I think the statement of OS for Alpharadin and MDV3100 are better is unfounded. It could well be that Cabo is better than any of those. As for dose reduction, i think lower dose, but more frequent dosing is better at maintaining the drug concentration in a patient. The efficacy shouldn't be affected, whereas off target side effect is reduced.