Recent

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

Momenta Pharmaceuticals Inc. Message Board

dr.vinmantoo 91 posts  |  Last Activity: Aug 28, 2016 12:49 AM Member since: May 18, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Vinny boy

    by coolhandlucy007_007 Jun 15, 2016 6:46 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 15, 2016 10:43 AM Flag

    Lucy provides the response of the typical ignorant long, fingers stuck tightly in her ears, shouting nyah, nyah nyah I can't hear you. That is what the FUD matrna is all about, ntohg is ever wrong or bad so keep smiling while you are financially stripped naked by an incompetent board and beaten senseless. What eve happened to the "In Garnick we trust" mantra that was supposed to silence all doubters and reassure PPHM longs as Bavi faiIure after failure mounted?

    I have provided systematic and scientifically based reasoning to excoriate the moronic IHUB longs and their delusional pie in the sky dreams of a PPHM empire, and all their absurd fantasies about why failed trials aren't really failed trials. It will sting you that much more as PPHM racks up failure after failure in the coming years, knowing you could have saved money or made money on something else instead of losing even more money PPHM. I won't laugh because I hate seeing people lose money. However, I will shake my head in astonishment about that people who know little or nothing about science are so sure their investment will be a dramatic success that it will change the field of oncology. Truly amazing.

  • Reply to

    What doesn't CloakedP umderstand?

    by learningcurve2020 Jun 14, 2016 6:44 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 16, 2016 12:21 PM Flag

    {{Oh please! He's mocking them. I can picture him giggling with every paragraph that gets a response. }}

    That would make more sense than someone being so clueless as to actually believe PPHM will submit a BLA based on Sunrise and get FDA approval.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 13, 2016 1:40 PM Flag

    {{Working tirelessly to drive home the "outperforming control arm" story with nothing but King's horrible past track record to work with. Working tirelessly to legitimize the Sunrise trial when the lack of any evidence of its existence seems to say it was only a game just to raise cash. No data, no patient or physician chatter, no DMC identity, no published anything. And the guy presumably running the show and getting paid big bucks by shareholders, doing a disappearing act after it's discovered he was working for a competing biotech chasing a lung cancer cure with trials running.}}

    Don't forget the twin conspiracy theories that are red meat on the IHub board. Big Pharma not only conspired to sabotage Bavi trials, they conspired to kill off researchers working on the PS pathway. They did this in a vast conspiracy whose plotters are masters at the art of silence, much better than the CIA. It is sheer criminal genius. The big question is; Why Big Pharma would engage in such a broad based conspiracy they when they could have bought PPHM for a rounding error in their budget?

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 4, 2016 1:19 PM Flag

    Ha, ha, you are touting an upgrade to a $1 price target. Now that is funny.

  • Reply to

    1.00

    by jay_scott27 Jun 17, 2016 9:18 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 17, 2016 12:40 PM Flag

    {{Why don't you just quit now and leave the bashing to the professionals like LC, Dr. V, and a few others }}

    Jeff, providing scientifically based factual information isn't bashing. It is providing a service to help uninformed people who might be misled by PPHM shills, the worst of which is Cloaked Protector. It is no wonder he is cloaked because if his true identity were revealed he would be either put under psychiatric observation and then committed to an institution, or sued by the SEC.

  • {{The embarassment of inviable presidential candidates speaks for itself}}

    Yes it does, but that is besides the point. You vote for a person based on the options available. Donald Trump is a psychopath, and anyone who thinks he should be president is beyond stupid. He is a loud-mouth bully who can't stand any criticisms, so has harassed anyone who does so. He is only motivation is to collect more money for himself and it doesn't matter who he hurts to get there. He is woefully ignorant of diplomacy and world affairs, says anything at anytime without thinking, and changes his statements almost daily.

    {{and if you believe that there is a capable leader amongst this years' candidates...you are every bit as incapable in your skills as a citizen as those in the running for our top office.}}

    One again you attempt to deflect and avoid answering a simple question. I said nothing of the sort. When you are given bad choices you hold your nose and pick the lesser of two evils. I do know that Donald Drumpf is a disaster and woe to the country and the word if that egomaniac is ever given the levels of power.

    {{Your mother must be very proud to call you her son...}}

    Yes she was, and she had plenty of reasons for being proud, and still does. Thanks for recognizing that.

    {{I cast my vote for beans & M-16s...}}

    Adults face their problems and attempt to solve them intelligently. You are one of those idiot rednecks running to hold your little gun as if it is a solution. How sad and childish.

  • Reply to

    What doesn't CloakedP umderstand?

    by learningcurve2020 Jun 14, 2016 6:44 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 15, 2016 11:22 PM Flag

    learningcurve, that is the wrong question. You should have asked, what DOES he understand? The answer is obviously, NOT MUCH.

  • Reply to

    Semi-serious question for the Bashers

    by jeff4iam4 May 27, 2016 12:21 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 29, 2016 1:58 PM Flag

    The touting of FUD as somehow a bad trait is the mark of someone unable to face reality. It is analogous to someone sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting repeatedly, nyah, nyah, nyah, I can't hear you.

  • Reply to

    Question for Jeff

    by dr.vinmantoo Jun 20, 2016 7:20 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 24, 2016 1:32 PM Flag

    Jeff, here is your problem in a nutshell.

    {{Not that I am admitting that the NSCLC trials did not show Bavi works....they did...but the trial itself was not successful enough due to several circumstances to get FDA approval on their own. }}

    The Sunrise NSCLC trial failed, and failed miserably, which means Bavi failed in combination with docetaxel.

    {{I am still on the side of the fence that Bavi works and will likely work well in I/O and the collaborations going on tell me a lot of other smart people see a lot of promise with Bavi as well.}}

    PPHM has ZERO collaborations in the real sense of the word. I have never said Bavi cannot work or is doomed to failure. I have said it is a real longshot and given reasons based on its MOA and clinical trial data. I have buttressed this opinion by citing the facts that Bavi has failed as a single agent or in combination with chemo in multiple human trials and in multiple cancers. In contrast, I cited that agents which modulate single receptors (anti-PD1, anti-CTLA4) or single ligands (ant-PD-L1) have shown sufficient benefits in clinical trials as to be approved in multiple cancers. CP and other on the IHub board dismiss this difference as they tout Bavi. It is astonishing to read. I then pointed out that trial combining two such single agents in trials (two in the same pathway or two from different pathways) already appear to be synergistically improving results. CP dismissed this and stated flat out that you need to block 10 or 12 receptors simultaneously in trials and that Bavi is the magic drug that can do it. It is astonishing to read.

  • Reply to

    when a 20 dollar stock goes up 5%

    by barc37000 Jul 6, 2016 11:39 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jul 6, 2016 12:01 PM Flag

    The poor guy is bitter about having his shorts burned.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 11, 2016 1:16 PM Flag

    {{Cap'n when you see the predicted buyout price per share claims that frequent this mb, realize that they are puffery (better ingredients makes better pizza!). If you want a BOE guess, take your best guess at realistic lifetime revenue to EXEL from Cabo and Cobi and halve it. Alternatively use a realistic (not best case) peak sales estimate and multiply it by 3.5. Don't use comparisons to companies with ongoing drug discovery platforms or full pipelines for comparison. }}

    Ernie, interesting formula for determining buyout price. I like the peak sales one. How did you come up with them? Was it based on an analysis of multiple examples of buyouts?

  • Reply to

    Semi-serious question for the Bashers

    by jeff4iam4 May 27, 2016 12:21 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 31, 2016 1:51 AM Flag

    Well, it looks like all the very confident longs can't or won't answer. {{Why do you think/believe Bavi is the best and most important immune modulating agent in the world when it has failed time after time in human trials?

    PPHM longs keep having their hats on pre-clinical work on cell lines or mouse models. That is a very low bar for any drug to clear. The tumors in mouse models are designed to develop quickly and are more homogeneous than human tumors. In addition, the mice are young and have robust immune systems. The repeated failure of Bavi in multiple human trials means you have to start asking questions like the following on I previously posed.

    {{What are the possible negatives aspects of its MOA, especially compared to the strategy of direct modulation of immune cell activity like interfering with the PD-1/PD-L1 receptor/ligand interaction?}}

    Bavi has multiple strikes against it in this regard. I believe Bavi has a half-life of about 1 day, which is relatively short. You want your antibody to remain around to mediate its effects, and successful therapeutic antibodies generally have much longer half-lives than one day.

    More important/problematic is the target numbers. How many antibody-binding targets are present, and what percentage of the receptors must to be bound by your antibody to elicit the desired response? There are only about 10,000 PD-1 receptors on a T-cell, and so at most that many antibody molecules need to be bound to relieve the PD-L1 inhibition, but the number is likely much smaller.

    continued

  • Reply to

    Hey Antwan

    by learningcurve2020 Jun 5, 2016 10:12 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 20, 2016 12:10 PM Flag

    {{FIVE months go by in 2012 with obvious control arm performance issues but leadership never thinks to check arms a,b,c }}

    You mean when the "control" arm for that phase II was a mere 5.7 months, and when you looked at the Kaplan-Meier curves, the "control" arm showed a major drop at one time-point that resembled a plane crash that killed all the passengers?

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 8, 2016 8:47 PM Flag

    Thanks for noticing. Did you see what the idiots on IHub are now alleging? Big Pharma could buy PPHM for a rounding error in their budgets. Instead of doing that, the IHub conspiracy theorists propose a conspiracy by Big Pharma not only to sabotage PPHM trials, but to actually to kill off people doing PS research in order to stop targeting drugs from getting approved by the FDA. How funny is that?

  • Reply to

    Question for Jeff

    by dr.vinmantoo Jun 20, 2016 7:20 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 25, 2016 1:23 AM Flag

    As usual, when you counter the shameless pumper CP, your post on IHbu gets deleted. Here is the exchange.

    CP wrote {{vinmantoo, it doesn't matter that a singled out drugs that addresses one specific PS receptor shows some (limited) clinical improvement. You need to bind them ALL (10+ receptor types) together and the only way to do that in a synchronised way is capping Phosphotidylserine (PS) and not mixing 10+ drugs to block Tim1, Tim3, Tim4, Axl, Mer, Tyro-3, CD300a, RAGE, BAI-1, Stabilin etc}}

    I responded: Right, the clinical improvement from use of anti-PD-L1, or anti-CTL4 or anti-PD1 antibodies was so limited that the FDA approved multiple treatments as single agent in various cancers. In contrast, the magic all powerful, all purpose Bavi failed in single agent in in combo in trial after trial. Yes you have a real strong point there. I don't know where you are getting that idea from, but it has been clearly been proven wrong based on human clinical trials and FDA approval. Results have been even more promising when combining two such targets, either in the same pathway, (anti-PD-L1 + anti-PD1) or in different pathways (anti-PD-L1 and anti-CTL4). You need to stop with the nonsense that you need to bock all 10 or 12 receptors to get an effect.

    CP wrote {{The PS from APPOPTIC cells is NEGLIGIBLE compared to the PS exposed due to other therapy damage (CHEMO, RADIO, etc).}}

    I like when you just invent something and then write in upper case letters to try and give it legitimacy. That is flat out wrong. The is an estimated 25 million PS molecules per cells.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22858544

  • Reply to

    Question for Jeff

    by dr.vinmantoo Jun 20, 2016 7:20 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 25, 2016 1:25 AM Flag

    Part 2:

    CP wrote: {{Furthermore only vascular endothelial cells count (not all others including lymphomatic endothelial cells) because blood only gets in contact with the vascular type and all drugs and immune cells we are talking about here are in the blood environment.}}

    What are you talking about? Are you actually saying antibodies are only present in the blood? Wow!

    CP wrote: {{The life span of endothelian cells (time from being created till the apoptotic cycle starts) is months to years.}}

    What does that or the lifespan of other cells have to do with anything. Wow! Wow! The rest of your post isn't worth commenting on. Thanks for the very revealing post. It says a lot but doesn't say anything.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 26, 2016 2:57 PM Flag

    Then this poster named hopefilled asks me {{Are you trying to convince people here to sell? Good luck with that!}}

    I responded with: I come here for both amusement and out of a sense of altruism. I don't care whether anyone buys or sells. I do care about people repeatedly posting things that have no basis in reality and counter them. I take the time to post facts, or scientifically based opinions that give people a reasonable data base from which to make their own decisions. . I have been thanked in the past for providing information that helped them make better investment decisions. I have also been helped by other people doing the same. The Biotech Values board is the best public forum to obtain such information, and just a few of the best posters there, are jq1234, ifwal, dewophile, poorgradstudent and dewdiligence.

    Of course hopefilled's comment stays up but mine get deleted as being off topic.

  • Reply to

    Note to self

    by learningcurve2020 Jun 28, 2016 10:37 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 28, 2016 12:52 PM Flag

    {{Not only don't they care they're making jokes.}}

    That is called gallows humor.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jul 1, 2016 11:06 PM Flag

    It also works well as a floor wax. Amazing!!

  • Reply to

    Question for Jeff

    by dr.vinmantoo Jun 20, 2016 7:20 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Jun 24, 2016 1:34 PM Flag

    Jeff,

    {{I suggest that you re-evaluate your position and quit telling other people that their research and opinions are hogwash compared to yours because you (and most everyone else) are not perfect and do not have all the information required to make a definitive statement as to whether Bavi works well or not.}}

    When people post absolute nonsense and gibberish, like CP often does, I will call him or her on it. I never said I had all the answers and am always open to more information.

MNTA
12.165-0.035(-0.29%)10:55 AMEDT