I will also point out that a IMGN and MVDN are safer choices with smaller risk and smaller rewards, but it isn't bad to have them in your portfolio as well as the riskier ones I just mentioned.
d2foxes, as you might recall, I owned ONCY more than 5 years ago and bailed with only minor losses. Brad Thompson is a clueless CEO, and Reolysin was a very risky approach. That combination is toxic. I also stated I shifted to ONXX when I sold ONCY in the mid $3s, and gave the reasons why. I always respected your reasoned opinions and your clear, critical thinking when data was presented, and I see you are still at it.
Great point about drug trials being a scientific experiment. I can tell you from experience that many times I conduct an experiment with confidence at what the result would be, then being truly surprised at what the results were. Often the results to a much better understanding of the problem I am studying, am leads to new avenues of research.
I cringe when I see people talking about doubling down or something of the sort after bad news, especially when it is based on hope or blind devotion. I was hurt by that approach early in my biotech investing, and learned a very painful lesson. People need to spread their risk around, and adjust holdings periodically in all the stocks they hold. Rather than doubling down here, if one wants to find a risky stock that is down but has a chance for a nice potential reward down the road, consider some SNTA or EXEL.
I like reading about pre-clinical data that gives us more information about the Ganetespib's mechanism of anti-cancer activity. However, pre-clinical data on cell lines won't move the stock.
sbhatia12345, you wrote "Nktr was supposed to go to 16, it just had a tiny bump. Why would pgnx go higher. I would love it if it goes to 6.50"
Clearly you haven't looked closely at the difference between NKTR and PGNX. Do you want to know why PGNX will do better than NKTR? Well, I will tell you why. NKTR has a $1.7 billion market cap whereas PGNX has only a $360 million market cap. The fact that PGXN has a nearly 5x smaller market cap than NKTR means it will receive a much bigger boost. NKTR won't be launching their drug until sometime in the first half of 2015. In contrast, PGNX can immediately start selling Relistor upon FDA approval as the drug is already approval and a sales force is in place. PGNX will net a $40 million milestone for FDA approval of subcutaneous Relistor in chronic pain, which is more than 10% of its market cap. I don't know what milestones NKTR will get, but it sure as hell won't be more than 10% of is market cap. PGNX also has the prospect of another milestone of $50 million upon approval of the oral Relistor formulation. A completed phase III trial shows it works well and with a better side effect profile than the subcutaneous version. When the FDA grants label expansion of Relistor into the chronic pain market, PGNX and its shareholders should do well.
SLXP just received approval for a drug other than Relistor. As far as Relistor, the NKTR approval should remove any doubts about Relistor approval. Don't forget that will get PGNX a $40 million milestone. Looking forward to hearing how the FDA discussions on oral Relistor is going.
Oh, I see you now made a $3 price prediction. Good strategy doubling down when your previous prediction didn't come true.
ericknl22, you kept telling us SNTA would be at $3.50. What happened?
It won't be long before the imbecile jmelink will be assuring us that PGNX won't hold $6.
""The data was generated by the laboratory of Dr. Scott Friedman of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and showed that the drugs were able to able to reverse the most advanced stage of liver fibrosis, cirrhosis, in experimental animals given toxin-induced cirrhosis.""
1) There is no data which says that mice will be predictive for humans in treatments for NASH since there are no approved drugs.
2) The human target NASH population develops NASH over a long time, usually due to poor diet and or alcohol abuse. They didn't develop it after acute short-term toxin treatment. The mice develop fibrosis after acute toxin mediated injury. That means the one can't make solid extrapolations of the data to humans, making any predictions not worth very much.
3) Humans tend to be old and sick when they develop NASH, but the mice in studies are young and healthy so the latter will have far better recuperative powers.
Don't be so dumb. Any positive data on cancer cell lines is trivial, and positive data in mouse models data is only slightly less trivial. If you can't show excellent data on experiments with cell lines or mouse models, then your treatment is worthless. If your treatment show excellent efficacy in both, it only means you can move onto phase I trials. Oncology is littered with treatments that were spectacular successes in mice but they were miserable failures in human trials. There are a number of reasons why mouse models for cancer are horrible predictors of success in human trials, but you wouldn't be interested. By the way, there is zero clinical trial data supporting Davanat as an effective anti-cancer treatment.
As far as NASH, since treatments are so new there is track record of no any animal models showing with any good predictive value. Try and think about that for a bit before attacking.
You know people are clueless when the refer to pre-clinical data as if it were proof, especially when dealing with cell lines,
Oh please stop with the non-sense that anyone who understands the biochemistry of this drug and read the scientific papers knows this drug will show efficacy. First, there is very little data in literature upon which to make an informed projection. Second, there is no good pre-clinical model to base optimism about how human trials will play out. Third, there is very little clinical trial data to analyze. Fourth, GALT/PRW has had a history of misinforming investors with hype, playing for fluff pieces that masquerade as independent research and making wild projections that don't ever come close to being true.
The HDC platform shouldn't have any value ascribed to it yet. Not a single conjugate is in trials yet, and SNTA hasn't even given us a rough timeline as to when the first trial will begin.
No worries ca_fisherman. I don't know either as I haven't owned a company which went through trying to get approval for a new formulation of a drug already on the market. I tried to google it to get some info but didn't get anywhere.