Ligand (LGND) - ONTAK Approval Rec
HenryNFox
Several analyst reports have come out on the ONTAK approval rec. They are
linked in the Analyst Table at http://home.att.net/~hniman/lgnd/lgndl3.htm
Henry L. Niman, Ph.D.
There are several news reports on the ONTAK approval rec linked to
http://home.att.net/~hniman/lgnd/ct.htm
Here's what AP had to say:
FDA Panel OKs Cancer Immunotoxin
Tuesday, June 2, 1998; 6:04 p.m. EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A bioengineered toxin should be approved to
treat a certain type of advanced lymphoma, government advisers
unanimously recommended to the Food and Drug Administration
Tuesday.
If the FDA ultimately agrees, Seragen Inc.'s Ontak could become the
nation's first immunotoxin, a unique type of cancer fighter.
At issue is cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, a rare lymph cancer that attacks
the skin, starting with severely itchy lesions.
Ontak consists of an immune system protein called interleukin-2 and a
noninfectious portion of diphtheria toxin. The IL-2 binds to receptors on
lymphoma cells, allowing the toxin to slip inside and kill the cells,
explained
Dr. Patricia Keegan of the FDA's Center for Biologics.
Seragen's major study infused Ontak into 71 advanced patients who had
failed standard treatments, Keegan said. Thirty percent of tumors
significantly shrank; seven disappeared.
The study couldn't tell how the tumor shrinkage affected patients' overall
symptoms, or how long the effect lasted, Keegan said. Seragen has begun
a larger trial to get those answers.
But the FDA's advisors said the early study was enough for Ontak to be
approved under a special program that allows promising cancer drugs to
be sold before final research is done.
The FDA is not bound by its advisers' recommendations, but typically
follows them.
Ontak caused numerous side effects, including fever and flulike symptoms
in 90 percent of patients, Keegan cautioned. Most of the side effects
responded to brief treatment. But the panel decided the side effects mean
Ontak should be offered just to advanced patients who have failed other
options, she said.
HankTheAngryDrunkenDwarf
On 05 Jun 1998 04:18:34 GMT, henr...@aol.com (HenryNFox) wrote:
>Several analyst reports have come out on the ONTAK approval rec. They are
>linked in the Analyst Table at http://home.att.net/~hniman/lgnd/lgndl3.htm
Why did the stock *drop* after the ONTAK approval?
I though that biotechs were suposed to rise after an aproval.
What is wrong with this stock?
Henry L. Niman, Ph.D.
tony, You sound the same, regardess of your handle.
HankTheAngryDrunkenDwarf
Any reason why you are avoiding the question of why LGND DROPPED to as low as $12 1/2
after ONTAK Approval! You said that LGND would 'fly' after aproval. What happened?
Answer the question!
On Fri, 05 Jun 1998 20:16:58 -0400, "Henry L. Niman, Ph.D." <HNi...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
Henry L. Niman, Ph.D.
Tony, You still haven't done anything about the AT&T Oraganization that is attached to
all of your posts.
HankTheAngryDrunkenDwarf
Henry Niman has responded 3 times to the post, yet he keeps avoiding the 'question'.
I guess Dr. Niman just doesn't know why Ligand (LGND)'s stock price dropped after
ONTAK approval.
Henry Niman was hyping that LGND was going to 'fly' off of its base of $14 after
Ligand filed its first NDA, yet after the filing it sank to 13 1/2. Then he touted
how LGND would use 14 as a 'springboard' after the Ontak approval, however it really
fell off of a cliff to 12 1/2 after the approval.
So, it appears that Henry Niman just doesn't know that much about Ligand, which
explains his reluctance to answer a direct question.
On Sat, 06 Jun 1998 15:24:05 GMT, Shoo...@Spammers.On.Site (ryan) wrote:
>On Sat, 06 Jun 1998 12:49:49 GMT, 13do...@LakeLigand.com
>(HankTheAngryDrunkenDwarf) wrote:
>
>>Any reason why you are avoiding the question of why LGND DROPPED to as low as $12 1/2
>>after ONTAK Approval! You said that LGND would 'fly' after aproval. What happened?
>>
>>
>>Answer the question!
>Maybe because you are beating a dead horse, or you post incessantly
>before someone has a chance to answer, or you have no life . . .
>anyone else have any ideas?
>
>
>=========================
>rais...@REMOVEworldnet.att.net
>REMOVE the REMOVE ;-)
>All above are opinions unless stated otherwise.
>Michigan State University . . . # 1 in Rioting!!!
Henry L. Niman, Ph.D.
Tony, I think that most readers here know who knows what about LGND. Your campaign (using
multiple handles here and on Yahoo) seems to be coming unglued.