it gets worse. according to Leerink analyst Michael Schmidt: "MRK has abandoned plans to run registration trial of pembrolizumab combined with a axitinib"" in frontline RCC."
Captain's "theory" was dead on. what are you talking about?
I personally purchased on 9/25/14 12,355 SHARES AT $1.67 and on
10/14/14 23,000 SHARES AT $1.4999
put that in your pipe and smoke it
"A badly injured mare has taken all of our time of late."
sorry to hear. beginning to think it might be you getting injured with all the wildfires
get a grip - dilution was already baked into price as soon after the words came out of MMM's mouth. Here's a reality check - ARIA - up ~ 45% after a modest surprise on earnings.
you and the other shorts will be covering at $12 while you wait for drop.
comm - I ended up with a loss when SCOTUS decided not to hear Sequenom patent case and subsequent purchase of Sequenom by LabCorp. I'm selling small lots of ARIA and EXEL to max out capitol gain/loss. My overall cost basis for both companies is in the low to mid 3s and selling a few shares with highest capitol gains will preserve the bulk of my investment. Things are really looking good for EXEL and ARIA.
agreed on BO theory. I don't care either way - it's all money in the bank at this point.
thanks. I've been in EXEL since 2007 - all cash, no options, etc.. Sold the most expensive shares I purchased back then when it spiked in 2011 but still have shares that I purchased in 2007. I'm traditional buy-and-hold dope but learned a lot over the years and bought a ton in 2014 after COMET crashed and burned. I plan on selling slowly in small amounts when sp spikes until they get bought out. this has been much better than putting money in a savings acct. or money market acct..
print media and analysts are still pumping the potential of immunotherapy while ignoring reality. good article today today in Forbes by Matthew Herper on BMY's defeat being a victory for personalized medicine. Article points out the failure is probably due to BMY trial took on all NSCLC patients regardless of PD-L1 status and then went on to point out that ~ 25% of NSCLC patients have high PD-L1. So success of PD1 blockade in NSCLC will be limited to a relatively small percentage of patients and there will continue to be a huge unmet medical need in spite of BMY's and "analysts" attempts to portray immunotherapy as the way of the future with little regard for small molecule therapeutics.
I agree - there is no strong scientific rationale that MRK's anti-PD1 antibody would work any better on the patients in BMY's failed trial lung cancer patients. Both are IgG4 isotypes and regardless of how and where they bind PD1 the net effect is to either block or down regulate PD1. We are not talking about small molecule inhibitors targeting specific proteins with differing DMPK, binding specificities, affinities, etc., which could lead vastly different patient outcomes.
yes, I think this failed trial will help EXEL in the long run and hopefully the patients.
KITE has a great chance of making headway with CAR-T because they are using T cells derived from same patient they treat (autologous). JUNO is trying to make an off-the-shelf CAR-T to use in any patient (allogeneic) - thus the need for ablative therapy to eliminate all patient's endogenous T cells along with any semblance of adaptive immunity. This approach, along with a bunch of former DNDN execs at the helm made me want to vomit when I heard what they are doing to patients.
BLUE is primarily into gene therapy and only beginning to dabble in CAR-T and immunotherapies for cancer.
thanks. assuming recruitment was initially slow but received a spike after METEOR coupled with hiring clinical science director indicates they are still on schedule for 2017. hopefully they get an early trial stop on interim which could easily happen with placebo comparator. we may even get word this year.
when was Clinical Scientist Director position posted? They are "currently performing maintenance" on their website. hmmmm....
having a placebo arm should provide clear difference early in trial but is definitely tough for recruiting purposes. but as you say - METEOR results may have accelerated enrollment. I didn't see anything about a scheduled interim analysis in clinicaltrials.gov site. Is this mentioned somewhere else? Or could this analysis be called by data monitoring committee. Would love to see trial called early based on overwhelming efficacy at interim.