Glaucoma docs are giving patients flaxseed oil as a possible neuroprotectant -- they don't know if it's good or not but, hey, what the heck. Also berries and other natural substances.
If the Inotek drug is a real neuroprotectant we have a huge marketplace of neurodegenerative diseases that open up.
It's still an early finding but could be a big thing.
Now we're talking Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and ALS.
Suddenly the picture looks very interesting for ITEK
And the underwriters did take the over-allotment.
Lates 10 filings (past week) show IP averaging 1,000+ barrels of oil per day in both Gonzales and LaVaca counties. No monsters -- but no duds either.
The Phase 2 study is a randomized, double-masked, active-controlled, multicenter trial comparing trabodenoson plus LAT, to timolol (the active comparator) plus LAT, in 120 patients with ocular hypertension (OHT) or primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). The study will measure the additive or synergistic IOP lowering effect of trabodenoson when combined with LAT, and will also evaluate the safety and tolerability of the combined treatment regimen. The total treatment time will be 3 months, during which the effect of trabodenoson will be evaluated following twice-a-day dosing (BID) and once-daily dosing (QD). Top line data is expected in the 4th quarter of 2014.
Inotek's medication has real potential -- that's what I would focus on at this pint.
The market seems to like Aerie (AERI) -- and their investigational glaucoma medication is no better than Inotek's as far as the trials demonstrate.
I stayed away a long time but if people don't know the difference between OPHT (Ophthotech) and OHRP it's pointless to continue to post serious factual information here.
Optimist -- you don't seem to k now the difference between OPHT and OHRP.
It's useless to conduct a serious discussion when people don't even know which stock is which.
Not so fast there, Optimist.
The Iluvien implant for DME by PSDV and ALIM has a tough side effect profile --cataracts are almost a certainty.So is increased IOP.
When you put medication into an implant or reservoir for three years it has to have characteristics of stability and be a small molecule. New drugs will have to be developed.
Nothing is simple in this business.
OPHT is still perfecting their sequence.
At the recent Angiogenesis Conference at Bascom Palmer, a pilot study was discussed in which the anti-PDGF (Fovista) is used as pretreatment to break down the pericytes guarding the VEGF. The results were remarkable as the anti-VEGF had a much easier task once the pericytes were stripped.
OPHT has some very smart people and they are adjusting their approach constantly.
Many of the people who post here should not even be in this sector as they don't know the rapid advances in the science taking place.
I guess you are forgetting about the 8 Lucentis injections per year that are part of this great "success" story.
One thing I can guarantee you is that eight injections a year will not be a competitive treatment burden in the next generation of therapies.
Well, I continue to believe that there are maybe 20 people in the country who truly understand what therapies will be dominating the retinal drug landscape in the next decade. Squalamine was always the longest of longshots. And now, with the competitive pipeline advancing at a breakneck pace, squalamine just doesn't bring enough to the table to win in the marketplace. They may do a phase 3 and meet their new endpoint and get approved and still not be a commercial product. Could be another Macugen.
Just about every investigational wet AMD drug in the pipeline now promises a more durable response -- two injections a year will be the new standard of the next-generation therapies. Most of the next-generation will be combinations like anti-PDGF and anti-VEGF, or Integrin Peptide and anti-VEGF, or Alcon's RTH258 and anti-PDGF.
Then, later, we will have the gene therapy companies offering real CURES for retinal diseases -- these are companies such as AGTC, Avalanche and Spark.
This may play out in a number of ways and the timing may not be what some of us expect. Some of the posts on this board have shown excellent knowledge while many posters are way out of their depth in even discussing therapies for retinal diseases. It's a good policy in life to know what you don't know. And that goes for stock analysts as well as the rest of us.
Fovista is part of a one-two punch.
You inject the Fovista first and it totally breaks up the pericytes that guard the VEGF.
Then you follow with anti-VEGF and you get a long-duration response.
When OPHT gets this sequence perfected you will need one or two injections per year.
The idea of eight injections a year will no longer be competitive.
The standard for the next generation of wet AMD drugs will be one or two injections per year.
Everyone will have to find a way to try to meet that standard.
Only hope would be to combo squalamine with a long-duration drug -- otherwise you are stuck with eight injections a year -- which won't cut it anymore. Long duration drugs are in the pipeline but not approved as yet. Making anything out of squalamine will take some creative thinking.
Yeah, well once the interim data came out last summer there was no reason to stick around.
Gene therapy is the longer-term CURE for retinal diseases. (AGTC, AAVL, ONCE)
The anti-PDGF with anti-VEGF combos will be the next-generation of drugs for wet AMD.
OPHT will be the first to get approval -- already well into phase 3
Fail to see why anyone was surprised.
Ohr will start a phase 3 with a new endpoint and possibly eventually win approval.
However, there are better therapies coming along that will probably make squalamine moot.
Every well was above 1,000+ barrels of oil per day initially.
Half were either 2,000+ barrels of oil per day or very close to 2,000 barrels.
They must be picking their spots carefully now -- as drilling program has been reduced.
These are much better numbers than we saw in late 2014 filings.
Potential buyers of PVA might be impressed.--but maybe PVA is just drilling its better prospects.