Sat, Aug 23, 2014, 10:57 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


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

Trius Therapeutics, Inc. (TSRX) Message Board

iloveallahgod 91 posts  |  Last Activity: Aug 21, 2014 11:50 AM Member since: Dec 31, 2011
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Cost of ETEP extrapolated to other treatments!

    by firedin2010 Aug 21, 2014 9:53 AM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 21, 2014 11:50 AM Flag

    I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Sarepta tested the assay system and its potential already by providing remaining tissue samples of earlier biopsies to Flagship, comparing its earlier dystrophin findings, and was pleased with the results.

  • Reply to

    mandatory srpt read

    by simp08801 Aug 20, 2014 7:29 PM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 21, 2014 8:43 AM Flag

    That's Tekmira's Marburg drug - article on their work published in Nature this week.

  • Nigeria’s government has requested experimental drug TKM-Ebola from Vancouver-based Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corp. (TKMR), Chukwu said. Idris said that as many as three manufacturers of experimental Ebola treatments had been contacted. (Bloomberg).

  • Reply to

    Ebola VP24 and AVI7537 link demonstrated

    by hardfocus Aug 19, 2014 2:38 PM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 19, 2014 2:56 PM Flag

    I believe Tekmira also uses a VP24 expression inhibitor.

  • Sierre Leone's health minister repeated the same caution to his country. "WHO has cautioned us about the risks involved as these drugs have not yet been certified and are still unregistered and untested," he said. Don't expect countries with Ebola concerns to jump at an opportunity to use untested, uncertified drugs.

  • Reply to

    Survival rates for Ebola.

    by onewaytomars2 Aug 12, 2014 1:22 PM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 12, 2014 10:39 PM Flag

    From World Health Organization (WHO): "Ebola outbreaks have a case fatality rate of up to 90%." That means a survival rate of 10%, Mars2.

  • iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 12, 2014 10:53 AM Flag

    Got it! Thanks for the citation.

  • I seem to recall an article or company presentation that described production of Ebola antibodies in non-human primates treated with Sarepta's Ebola drug but can't find the source. Anyone recall mention of antibody production? Seems to me that if Ebola antibodies are produced after treatment with Sarepta's drug, then the antibodies created in a treated patient may become a source of treatments and maybe even a vaccine. Just a thought.

  • Now that the world's top ethicists have said to use the drugs, America and other developed nations should treat this world crisis like any other crisis, and fund the cost of the drugs. It's no different than shipping food and other essentials around the world when people are dying because of natural disaster, maniacal insurgencies, and poverty.

  • The World Health Organization ruled today that use of untested Ebola drugs on Ebola patients is ethical. Another way to state WHO's ruling is that it is unethical not to treat Ebola patients with Ebola drugs in development. This ruling fully opens the door for widespread use of drugs like Sarepta's AVI-7537. Since the Mapp Pharmaceutical ebola drug is now depleted with no possibility of restocking for several weeks, it would be unethical not to use the other drugs on the shelf. Sarepta's will be used immediately, IMO.

  • iloveallahgod by iloveallahgod Aug 12, 2014 3:56 AM Flag

    Mapp Pharmaceuticals said it had sent all its available supplies to West Africa.

    "In responding to the request received this weekend from a West African nation, the available supply of ZMapp is exhausted," it said in a statement.

    Drug supplies will be used up as quickly as African nations can get their hands on them. Supplies are limited. Ebola victims and potential victims, not so much.

  • iloveallahgod by iloveallahgod Aug 10, 2014 10:12 PM Flag

    From Reuters: "All three U.S. facilities established to quickly make vaccines and therapeutics in the event of a major public health threat say they are standing by to support any U.S. government effort to scale up a treatment for Ebola.

    All three U.S. facilities established to quickly make vaccines and therapeutics in the event of a major public health threat say they are standing by to support any U.S. government effort to scale up a treatment for Ebola.
    A nurse wears protective clothing as he demonstrates the facilities in place at the Royal Free Hospital in north London on August 6, 2014, in preparation for a patient testing positive for the Ebola virus.
    Leon Neal | AFP | Getty Images
    A nurse wears protective clothing as he demonstrates the facilities in place at the Royal Free Hospital in north London on August 6, 2014, in preparation for a patient testing positive for the Ebola virus.

    The facilities, called Centers for Innovation in Advanced Development and Manufacturing (ADM), were set up by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in partnership with private industry, to respond to pandemics or chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear threats.

    They have the expertise to quickly switch production lines to manufacture, for example, a smallpox vaccine if that scourge were to re-emerge, or an anthrax vaccine, and other life-saving compounds against both natural outbreaks and bioterrorism.

    The decision to order any of the three advanced labs to begin making Ebola treatments would be made at the highest levels of the Obama administration."

  • iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 10, 2014 12:48 PM Flag

    Jay, AVI and the DOD jointly invented the earlier filovirus patents, though they were assigned to AVI (now Sarepta). The patents don't speak to rights of ownership contracted between AVI and the DOD. Later Ebola/Marburg patents (e.g. patent no. 8,703,735, granted April 2014) were exclusively invented by the company (Iversen and Weller) and granted to Sarepta. Again, though, they don't speak to contractual rights to patent use.

  • iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 10, 2014 10:51 AM Flag

    Nonsense. Sarepta should not conduct these tests independently. Neither virus presents a commercially marketable product worth hundreds of millions of dollars in research and development. Besides, the government is a co-owner of the patents.

  • Reply to


    by cal12345 Aug 9, 2014 10:00 AM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 9, 2014 3:29 PM Flag

    I recall reading somewhere that the patients chose the serum they eventually took. One of the patients is a doctor who, without any doubt, was well aware of what Ebola drugs were in development , including Sarepta's drug, since he was treating Ebola victims. Personal choices.

  • iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 8, 2014 8:32 AM Flag

    Gary, as much as I would like to believe that Sarepta's Ebola drug "is the best out there", that statement is not true. Tekmira's drug showed 100 percent effectiveness is curing Ebola in primates; Sarepta's drug showed 60-80 percent effectiveness. Even if Temira's drug may have some side effects (apparently not so concerning to the FDA because it lifted its hold enough for emergency use), the cure way outweighs the risk of side-effects when the almost certain result without the drug is a horrible, painful death in a few days. I hope, however, that the government funds Sarepta's drug for release because it is readily available and is effective, too, but not as effective as Tekmira's.

  • Reply to

    If Ebola rx used, patient selection is key...

    by jrrt1 Aug 2, 2014 7:42 AM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 2, 2014 12:57 PM Flag

    One important distinction between Sarepta's Ebola drug and the others is that Sarepta completed a human clinical trial on one of its Ebola drugs. A human safety trial for AVI-6002, Sarepta's first Ebola drug (with similar success rates as its current drug) was successfully completed more than two years ago. DOD asked for a cheaper version, as I recall, and Sarepta devised one, AVI-7537, its current drug whose funding was cut because of federal budgeting constraints. Sarepta has an Ebola drug, proven safe and effective. No other company can say that. It should be tried. I am reticent about single subjects because if the patient is too far gone to survive, then the drug will be seen as ineffective. The government should ship over a batch, follow its administration closely - a clinical trial in the filed, if you will - and then rate its success.

  • iloveallahgod by iloveallahgod Aug 1, 2014 7:24 PM Flag

    Sarepta could get one for each of its tuberculosis and dengue drugs. Biomarin just sold one according to an SEC filing today:

    On July 29, 2014 (the "Closing Date"), BioMarin GALNS Ltd. ("Seller"), an Irish corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., a Delaware corporation (together with Seller, the "Company"), entered into an asset purchase agreement (the "Asset Purchase Agreement") with Regeneron Ireland, an Irish corporation ("Buyer").

    Pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, Seller sold to Buyer on the Closing Date its priority review voucher issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to the Company in February 2014 in connection with the approval of VIMIZIM (R), a new biological product for patients with Mucopolysaccharidosis Type IVA, also known as Morquio A syndrome (the "Priority Review Voucher").

    On July 30, 2014, in consideration for the sale of the Priority Review Voucher, Seller received from Buyer $67,500,000.

    Dengue is ready to enter pre-clinical testing using Sarepta's PMOx. Sarepta has also petitioned for priority review inclusion of Ebola and Marburg in the FDA short list of covered neglected tropical diseases.

  • Reply to

    Libel Can Be Costly

    by jim_himmel Jul 31, 2014 9:13 PM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Aug 1, 2014 6:51 AM Flag

    Many, if not most, of "pasteur420"'s posts are not cloaked as an opinion. They are stated as fact. The target of any post that is false and harms reputation,, whether the target is a company executive or the company itself, is libeled. It doesn't matter if the post is on a message board. Investors and other people associated with the injured party form opinions based on them, especially when the poster claims to be a scientist with decades of experience. Each such post is a separate claim - a separate cause of action - that could engulf the poster with legal claims with prolonged litigation and massive litigation costs. Which party of a libel lawsuit can better afford the costs of litigation? Maybe this post will get the injured parties thinking about that.

  • Reply to


    by mweathernw Jul 30, 2014 7:10 PM
    iloveallahgod iloveallahgod Jul 30, 2014 9:42 PM Flag

    While a current comment from the company would be nice, it was not necessary in order to cover Sarepta's Ebola and Marburg drugs. Plenty of articles written about them - some recent. Forbes either was sloppy in its research or intentionally left them out - both suggesting poor journalism.

13.630.00(0.00%)Sep 11 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

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.