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

Insmed Incorporated Message Board

zake1 76 posts  |  Last Activity: Nov 17, 2015 6:58 PM Member since: Oct 19, 1998
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Informal iPlex a farce??

    by insmhistorian Nov 17, 2015 5:18 PM
    zake1 zake1 Nov 17, 2015 6:58 PM Flag

    Historian. I was the reason for the post. I wasn't the reason it was deleted..That I do not know. While I did
    ask for all imput, and really have no issue with Terry's response since he was clear, and civil. I don't profess
    to know all, or should I say remember all of the matters surrounding Iplex, I do remember some of the
    studies done prior to the settlement agreement. I did have conversations with members of the medical
    team, after their official retirements from the company. I did not ask if they where under confidentiality agreements, and they did not offer a position on the matter. I tried to contact Dr. Allen prior to his death,
    and he was under a non disclosure agreement. My feelings about this molecule is based on the things I
    was made aware of prior to the agreement.
    I do understand Iplex is not central to INSM's approach to revenues at this time, but I do believe that
    eventually it will be a component in their arsenal going to market. I do believe a licensing agreement will
    probably be the avenue INSM takes, and I'm good with that.
    regards all

  • Reply to

    Thoughts on buyout:

    by farmboyva Nov 13, 2015 4:06 PM
    zake1 zake1 Nov 15, 2015 1:31 PM Flag

    Here's my feeble take on this, and I invite all that disagree to pipe in...
    As far as Iplex is concerned, there is no reason for trials..Once either the legal agreement
    runs out, or an partnering agreement is put In place,,Iplex could go to market. It has
    already been through more than one phase three trial, and passed with flying colors.
    The primary use would be for short stature. I would venture to also state I feel Iplex
    could get a fast track for compassionate use for ALS...
    Ok guys...shoot away...I'll hold still

  • zake1 zake1 Nov 14, 2015 2:53 PM Flag

    I've always wondered about these numbers..Especially when I look at the Morgan Stanley number.
    I personally own over 80,000 shares of INSM..I've asked myself if my shares are reflected in their
    holding numbers...Or if the shares reported to them are held in their own discretionary trading

  • Reply to

    Jessie tells truth, Terry...

    by biowatchdog Nov 9, 2015 4:13 PM
    zake1 zake1 Nov 9, 2015 5:26 PM Flag

    I won't jump into the income recognition conversation simply because there isn't enough of it now
    to matter..
    What I will offer my own take on is without question Lewis and Company missed their timing targets
    on this study. This is the second miss with this company in the last couple of years. That causes me
    to believe they won't miss again. If anything, the overviews I read in the earnings call transcripts
    seem to without question state that management has taken note of this miss, and are steeing to
    be more conservative on future outlooks. Even to the point of being able to over perform on some
    fronts. I wouldn't be surprised to find the company actually exceeds some of the timelines they have
    laid out simply because they know they have to...Their credibility is at stake. I assure you many of
    the funds that made recent investments here aren't very happy about this. You add this delay to the
    downdraft in bio stocks lately, and this is a big blunder.
    We do notice, that not only did Lewis recognize this, but more muscle in the form of a clear market
    leader in this field was brought on board. While I don't like the setback, I think I see some logic to
    much of what has been said, and will add more shares if it drops further.
    regards all.

  • Reply to

    From the conference call CF

    by zake1 Nov 7, 2015 8:29 AM
    zake1 zake1 Nov 7, 2015 6:27 PM Flag

    I noticed someone deleted their input to this discussion,,I wish they hadn't...There was some
    value there..I would like to add to this thread the following comment from the quarterly conference.
    I know some will shoot down the relevance of what Mr. Lewis is saying, or they may fail to really
    interpret his point..but I've noticed this vague inference in prior conversations. Draw whatever
    conclusions you like, but I see something of value here.

    With respect to our fourth goal, and our earlier stage pipeline, here, too, we remain on track. Last month we submitted our IND for INS 1009, and we expect to begin a Phase I study later this year. We are also advancing several other research projects, and expect to share some details in the coming months, after we further validate our initial findings with additional pre-clinical data.

  • Okay. On the EMA, you asked NTM only and the strategy there and why step away from CF? The similarity challenge is what provoked our belief that it would be wiser to return to CF at some point in the future. Again, we hit our primary endpoint on the phase 3 study across Europe in CF. By setting aside that opportunity for now, it enables us to focus our resources on NTM. Obviously, there’s a lot going on at the company but I think this is also the right strategic move when we look at where we end up if we can secure NTM approval in Europe. This is an appropriately unmet medical need that this drug we think is going to make a material difference in. Some of the best examples of the regulatory posture with regard to that at least on a country basis can be seen in France where the ATU approval, which is getting reimbursed at around $60,000 a year shows that there is both a recognition of the need and a support for the use of this drug. And I think that is probably the best harbinger of what the commercial opportunity we think is for ARIKAYCE in the treatment of NTM if it’s approved across Europe. Does that answer your question? I think CF is off the table for now. There is the opportunity to return to it, but I think in a world that is genericizing inhaled CF antibiotics is not the area of greatest unmet medical need and that’s what driving our decision.

  • Reply to

    very long...very long time...insm rocks

    by hhand219 Oct 28, 2015 9:01 PM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 28, 2015 9:49 PM Flag

    hand,,,good to hear from you...

  • Reply to

    Sign seen on vacation......

    by insmhistorian Oct 27, 2015 5:44 PM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 27, 2015 5:59 PM Flag

    I'm more concerned if he's ready to meet me..

  • Reply to

    Presentation tomorrow in Orlando

    by justarook04 Oct 26, 2015 8:06 AM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 26, 2015 8:13 AM Flag

    A01Pulmonary Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Infections:
    Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs in Medicare
    Patients at a U.S. Health Plan
    Abraham K1, Dufour R2, McDermott K3, Tarr A2. 640 Eden Park Dr.,
    Cincinnati, OH 45202;; 513.826.7210
    1Humana; 2Comprehensive Health Insights; 3Insmed
    BACKGROUND: Pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial (PNTM)
    infections are difficult to diagnose, since their symptoms (e.g., cough,
    dyspnea, hemoptysis and fatigue) are common in other respiratory
    comorbidities. These overlapping symptoms may mask the infection,
    delaying diagnosis. PNTM infections are increasing among patients
    65 years old and can exacerbate deterioration of lung function,
    compounding respiratory problems for some patients with serious
    comorbidities. PNTM infections are challenging to diagnose and treat,
    which can lead to prolonged treatment with multiple antibiotics as
    well as increased resource utilization and costs.
    OBJECTIVE: Pre- and post-diagnosis resource utilization and costs for
    patients with PNTM infection and matched controls were examined.
    METHODS: Using Medicare medical and pharmacy claims between
    January 1, 2007, and May 31, 2014, patients with PNTM infection
    (defined by ≥ 2 separate medical claims for PNTM infection
    [ICD-9-CM 031.0]) (n = 738) and matched controls (n = 5,166) were
    identified; first diagnosis served as index date. Both groups had ≥ 18
    months of continuous enrollment pre- and post-index. Patients with
    PNTM infection were further split by those treated with ATS/IDSA
    guidelines-based antibiotics (n = 214) and those not treated (n = 524).
    Resource utilization calculations were completed for each group
    of patients on 8 categories (e.g., Inpatient Stays, Outpatient Visits).
    Healthcare costs were computed using the allowed amount and were
    reported in 2013 dollars for all medical, pharmacy, and total (medical
    + pharmacy) costs.
    RESULTS: Pre- and post-diagnosis resource utilization was higher
    across all service categories for patients with PNTM infection than
    for matched controls (P

  • Reply to

    Have Mercy

    by biowatchdog Oct 21, 2015 2:21 PM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 21, 2015 4:44 PM Flag you're connecting the dots..

  • Reply to

    As long as Institutions are NOT selling...

    by blank2thisone Oct 8, 2015 11:10 AM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 8, 2015 12:02 PM Flag

    You are's are getting knocked down again..shorts are working the entire sector..this has nothing
    to do with INSM...good place to buy far as Major Pharma buying,,could be, but based on volume
    they're not getting much.

  • To go to INSM's website, and read the latest presentation. Very compelling. You might find another
    nugget of value there. INSM talks about a new area of interest that takes no additional investment,
    has a large unmet need base of patients, and requires little new effort..guess what that is?
    It's your company..go and see for yourself..

  • Reply to

    WOW a PR

    by justarook04 Oct 6, 2015 8:06 AM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 6, 2015 8:20 AM Flag

    I think the utilization patterns are big focal point.

  • Reply to

    WOW a PR

    by justarook04 Oct 6, 2015 8:06 AM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 6, 2015 8:14 AM Flag

    Add this to my reply
    : Nontuberculous Mycobacteria Lung Infections: Pre-index Comorbidity and Utilization Patterns at a Large US Health Plan

  • Reply to

    WOW a PR

    by justarook04 Oct 6, 2015 8:06 AM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 6, 2015 8:12 AM Flag

    I tried to post this, but there is a link attached that can't be transposed to this board. It appears as though
    they are revealing new information, and an update to their studies..

  • Reply to

    We may see $5.+ today

    by mralfa Oct 1, 2015 8:14 AM
    zake1 zake1 Oct 1, 2015 8:36 AM Flag

    it's easy to guess who's short this stock..huh?

  • Reply to

    Spoke to IR...

    by jsblvbjb Sep 28, 2015 2:43 PM
    zake1 zake1 Sep 28, 2015 3:06 PM Flag

    Every bio stock I have is getting hammered..some of my bank stocks are taking it on the chin
    energy holdings have actually stopped there's a reason for scotch..There is no INSM specific
    news out there, so this isn't about INSM..Talked to my folks at MS..They say this is something I'm just going
    to have to be patient about..They actually expect the market to end the year up..Hell,,I wasn't going to spend
    the money right now,,no worries..
    regards all.

  • This isn't INSM specific,,,and it's not with a lot of volume..Stops being taken out..this is being pushed
    down...can be pushed up just as worries...

  • Reply to

    One Day

    by bohemianclubman Sep 23, 2015 11:09 AM
    zake1 zake1 Sep 23, 2015 12:03 PM Flag

    If I could get her to speak out against my golf game,,maybe my scores would come down.

  • Reply to

    using market trades

    by iounothjing1 Sep 23, 2015 9:45 AM
    zake1 zake1 Sep 23, 2015 10:26 AM Flag

    It appears as though that little head fake didn't work..

16.59+0.55(+3.43%)Nov 25 4:00 PMEST