Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 12:59 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

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

Trius Therapeutics, Inc. (TSRX) Message Board

golongin2008 236 posts  |  Last Activity: 1 hour 53 minutes ago Member since: Nov 25, 2008
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 18, 2014 2:38 PM Flag

    Hanna... I agree 100% on everything you just posted. I do think that the surgical scar market could be huge if
    we truly have a product that can make a scar virtually become unseen, or even close to it. When 90%
    of the observing group points to our treated group as clearly having the better observable scar, then
    we may well have something very important to market down the road...

  • Reply to

    Where are the longs?

    by oaksapollo Dec 17, 2014 2:55 PM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 18, 2014 1:29 PM Flag

    $45-$50 easily doable in a buyout...

  • Reply to

    Where are the longs?

    by oaksapollo Dec 17, 2014 2:55 PM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 18, 2014 1:28 PM Flag

    Wondering if the Shire rumors are starting up with MGNX...Earlier this week it was NPSP....

  • golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 18, 2014 1:03 PM Flag

    Yes it was Hanna.. Very concise and informative. Said exactly what I stated in three earlier posts I made here on the issue. P values are a friggin joke when efficacy is established by visual means. The product/drug is designed to materially decrease the visability of surgical scars. It either does that, or it doesn't. This is not rocket science as far as evaluating the efficacy, ie, the results of the treatment(s). Insurance may not cover this type of treatment to begin with if they consider it purely cosmetic rather than medically necessary. If it is
    only marginally better than re-section by itself, there is no way they're going to cover it. But at least if the
    results are spectacular, patients will likely use and pay for it regardless.

  • Reply to

    Where are the longs?

    by oaksapollo Dec 17, 2014 2:55 PM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 18, 2014 10:45 AM Flag

    Right here and long huge from $18.75... Lovin the action but can't explain it today except possibly Shire may be surfacing as a buyout candidate. Yesterday it was NPSP...lol!

  • Reply to

    Today's Release

    by bi0technician Dec 17, 2014 6:38 PM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 18, 2014 9:07 AM Flag

    Come on gang. We're not dealing with a new drug that people are unsure whether it works or not.
    "P" values?...lol...Stat significance. Great when you're dealing the the effects of a drug that you cannot
    view internally as working or not. Here you can SEE whether it is working or not. "P" values when your
    control measure is a bunch of people looking at a scar and forming an opinion which scar looks better...
    the treated or non treated group? What the FDA will care about is whether the drug is doing any damage or harm to the patients. Safety. Both over the short term and the long term.,,,, As far as efficacy...You can either see that or not.

  • golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 18, 2014 8:58 AM Flag

    No sense doing the secondary until the stock is at least 5 pts higher IMHO... TTPHnow $38 this morning and basically has double plused after releasing trial results less than a year ago. We are very undervalued right now so hopefully they wait a bit before doing a secondary.

  • Reply to

    Company is understating things. Good.

    by helpme_hanna Dec 17, 2014 10:25 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 9:41 PM Flag

    biotechnician...First of all I am long large RXII and sitting on a nice loss from last year as well...

    The term "sustained effect" is NOT a clinical or medical term of art. "Sustained reduction in scar
    severity" is obviously plain English, concise, and should have been repeated in this PR. Sustained
    effect connotes nothing really. What effect were they refering to...? The lack of "effect" in the one
    month pictures or the better "effect" at three months?

    Sustained "reduction" means continuing reduction is scar size, shape or visability. Sustained "effect" means something very different, and the term was chosen very carefully by them...make no mistake about that.
    IMHO they were trying to impart that although the effect of the drug was continuing...perhaps even flattening or reshaping the scar to some degree, it was not reducing it's over all "size". IMHO...

  • Reply to

    How is ttph drug different

    by liebel53 Dec 17, 2014 6:37 PM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 9:19 PM Flag

    The basic difference between the antibiotics of TTPH and CEMP is that the TTPH antibiotic was designed to basically treat gram negative bacterias, whereas Soli from CEMP can be used in both gram positive and gram negative bacterias. Based on the price differentials from both companies we have at least 700 million in catch up value to make up once positive Phase 3 trial results are released....

  • golongin2008 by golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 3:51 PM Flag

    Bottom line...If you don't have anything material to put out in a release ......don't.
    Putting out a release with nonsensical terms such as "sustained effect" presumes those
    reading it are as ignorant about clinical terms as the person writing the release obviously
    was....

  • Reply to

    Company is understating things. Good.

    by helpme_hanna Dec 17, 2014 10:25 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 3:05 PM Flag

    OK Hanna...What does "sustained effect" mean? Of course you have to interpret that phrase as it
    is not a word of art in biotech land as far as I know. Been doing this for over 20 years and NEVER heard
    that phrase used by any physician, or in a press release.

  • Reply to

    Very weak PR.

    by blu_moon_e Dec 17, 2014 8:10 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 2:00 PM Flag

    That is 54% of the people viewing the respective treated versus non treated scars thought that the treated scars looked better. That leaves 46% who didn't. The data didn't say or imply that the scar looked 54% improved from the non treated one. It's visual.

  • Reply to

    Company is understating things. Good.

    by helpme_hanna Dec 17, 2014 10:25 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 1:40 PM Flag

    Hanna....You must of read a different press release then I did. Said nothing of what you posted in your first paragraph. That is what you "implied" from the release. A press release is only as good as the specific words that are used. All I saw was the term "sustained effect" which is a CYA term for "not much happening but
    maybe it will over time"... Very disappointed. If you have nothing very positive to say, then just don't say it.
    The CEO is a PR nightmare......

  • Reply to

    Very weak PR.

    by blu_moon_e Dec 17, 2014 8:10 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 9:17 AM Flag

    What we want to hear is 75% or better recognition for a nine month to a year study! Until or unless we get to that number it's pretty much irrelevant IMHO... That is when we will know we have a saleable drug.

  • Reply to

    RXI announces "sustained effect" of rxi-109.......

    by rmsacc Dec 17, 2014 7:29 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 8:56 AM Flag

    The one month findings sucked frankly. They should have worded the release (if it was true) that the 3 month obsevations confirmed the effective uptake of rxi-109 over time on reducing the visual effects of scarring on the treated versus the non treated group.

  • Reply to

    RXI announces "sustained effect" of rxi-109.......

    by rmsacc Dec 17, 2014 7:29 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 17, 2014 8:51 AM Flag

    rmsacc... What's your take on this PR and the wording "sustained effect"...?? I'm frankly underwhelmed with it...

  • Reply to

    News

    by debuguh Dec 15, 2014 10:30 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 16, 2014 3:44 PM Flag

    Latter part of 2015 for approval IMHO....

  • Trumps ML's $55...like it!!

  • Reply to

    News

    by debuguh Dec 15, 2014 10:30 AM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 15, 2014 12:06 PM Flag

    This announcement was pretty much expected by just about anyone who follows this stock, but it does
    remove the last real uncertainty prior to approval. We should have fairly clear sailing all the way to approval
    up to $40 IMHO... After that, and provided the drug is approved with no limitations or follow up studies...labeling issues, etc. the $55 target is very doable. I frankly think the company following FDA approval would be an ideal takeover target for a large pharma, and obviously north of $55...Holding
    and haven't sold one share... IMHO

  • Reply to

    I May Try and Acquire RLYP...

    by golongin2008 Dec 12, 2014 2:17 PM
    golongin2008 golongin2008 Dec 15, 2014 12:00 PM Flag

    The thumbs down are from some nut job on another board who I ticked off by bashing their stock and telling them I thought it would file for BK (which it did about four months ago...lol). So he has been following me around now for about six months looking for my posts on any board, and putting thumbs down on them under multiple alias. Obviously he's crazy, but my hope is he's not dangerous to himself, or to others. Yahoo won't do anything about it unfortunately. Crazy people all over this world who really need help.

TSRX
13.630.0000(0.00%)Sep 11 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.