driver
- 30 Mar 2006 17:03
potatohead
- 12 Dec 2006 15:16
- 731 of 1180
oh please read the news update.. it states they have moved into phase two
StarFrog
- 12 Dec 2006 15:37
- 732 of 1180
PH - Why avoid my question?
Let me spell it out for you (you seem to have difficulty grapsing simple concepts).
1) Today you have posted that there is great news implying a tie-up with a patent owned by EIRx and work being done by Eli Lilly. In fact you even attempted to start two more threads on the subject.
2) EIRx do have a patent that mentions SURVIVIN.
3) Eli Lilly are about to enter phase 2 trials with work on SURVIVIN.
4) SURVIVIN is the name of a polypeptide and is not patented or owned by any one individual or company.
5) Eli Lilly have no tie-up with EIRx and have announced no programme of work with them.
6) Post 722 - EIRx have no partnership with ISIS.
So the news that Eli Lilly has released (via ISIS) has absolutely no bearing on EIRx.
Or am I missing something here, in which case, and as I have previuosly requested, please enlighten us all.
potatohead
- 12 Dec 2006 15:50
- 733 of 1180
oh for gods sakes..
are you seriously this blind..
Marcel1970
- 12 Dec 2006 15:54
- 734 of 1180
YES YES YES
potatohead
- 12 Dec 2006 15:58
- 735 of 1180
(AP) - In a Dec. 11 story about licensing deals in the biotechnology sector, The Associated Press erroneously named the employer of analyst Eric Ende. He works for Merrill Lynch, not Bank of America. A corrected version of the story appears below.
NEW YORK (AP) -- Last week's licensing deal between Roche Holding AG and Halozyme Therapeutics Inc. potentially worth as much as $581 million over the next 10 years marked another highlight for the biotechnology sector, as analysts predict licensing costs will get steeper.
Related newsJapanese Stocks Fall; Dollar DownInvestors Seek Signs of Robust SpendingMore Jobs in Nov., Unemployment Up Too
Licensing deals between pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies is the norm for the industry, giving development stage companies the money to continue developing products, while larger companies get a chance to bolster their product pipelines.
But with more large companies facing pipeline holes, biotech companies are seeing more money being thrown their way for innovative products, and the deals could lead to future acquisitions.
"That's going to continue to heat up and pick up," said Jason Napadano, senior biotechnology analyst at Zach's Investment Research. "The reason it's happening is that you have these large pharmaceutical companies with an unprecedented number of products going off patent."
That could amount to billions of dollars in losses for some of the major pharmaceutical companies.
The deal last week between Halozyme and Roche calls for the use of Halozyme's drug delivery technology in products being developed by Roche.
Some of the more standard licensing agreements entail the smaller biotechnology company developing the drug with payments from its larger partner, then splitting, in some form, the profits when it hits the market.
Bank of America analyst Eric Ende said in a November report that smaller biotech companies have been seeing higher deal prices as they seek to gain more control over their products. And big pharma has been willing to pay to fill lagging pipelines. The higher licensing prices are partially leading to more expensive buyout deals.
In October, Merck & Co. said it would buy small biotechnology outfit Sirna Therapeutics Inc. for $1.1 billion. Abbott Laboratories is in the process of buying Kos Pharmaceuticals for $3.7 billion.
"Big pharma could start knocking on the door of biotech with market caps of $5 billion," said Morningstar analyst Karen Andersen.
"If you're a pharmaceutical company and you want these products and need these products, biotech can continue to demand these types of big prices," Zack's Napadano said.
By most estimates, the market for licensing deals and pricier acquisitions will continue into 2007. News last week that Pfizer Inc. ended a late-stage program on its experimental heart drug highlighted the company's pipeline problems, with many analysts predicting it will acquire another company, possibly within the next year.
potatohead
- 12 Dec 2006 16:13
- 736 of 1180
its your last chance to top up now!!!
driver
- 12 Dec 2006 16:13
- 737 of 1180
I can't find the connection only that survivin is mentioned in the pdf file in the header, having said that if mike says there is one, there may be.
Finds known targets (e.g. aurora, survivin, PKC)
http://www.eirx.com/eirx_heading_images/Yokohama2005.pdf
driver
- 12 Dec 2006 16:18
- 738 of 1180
Also here.
As little as 5 years ago cancer was still thought of largely in terms of a proliferative disease. In contrast, EiRx has built its discovery model around what has now become established dogma; namely that cancer cells critically require a block on the induction of apoptosis. Experiments have shown that proliferative stimuli alone, such as overexpression of the oncogene cMyc, rapidly trigger apoptosis and elimination of the cell. In this context, induction of apoptosis can be seen as a safety mechanism. Blockade of apoptosis can occur through dysregulation of apoptosis effectors such as p53 or from an increase in a survival signals, such as upregulation of discrete genes (e.g.
survivin and bcl2) or from the up regulation of an entire survival pathway (e.g. PI3K/AKT).
The charts below illustrates example results from these assays.
Survivin and aurora, both of which were identified using ALIBI, represent control genes. Extensive data generated for all kinase, GPCR and other enzyme targets demonstrates direct functional modulation of apoptosis and cancer cell death, from both long term clonagenicity and molecular apoptosis assays. Induction of apoptosis and cell death for many targets compares well with siRNA specific to
survivin and aurora controls
http://www.billamag.net/focus-text-main-quoted.asp?FocusTextID=33
potatohead
- 12 Dec 2006 16:23
- 739 of 1180
there is, its been confirmed by phone by mike if you go over to the dark side
StarFrog
- 12 Dec 2006 16:37
- 740 of 1180
I stand by my post 732.
PH - Your post 735 in response has again NOTHING TO DO WITH EIRx.
Driver - I'm not sure what your handle is on this little tete-a-tete. I'm not denying that EIRx have patents involving the use of Survivin, I'm just questioning PH's implication of a tie-up with Eli Lilly (something that he still refuses to provide evidence for).
StarFrog
- 12 Dec 2006 16:50
- 742 of 1180
But PH never lets the facts spoil a good story. ;-)
LOL
potatohead
- 12 Dec 2006 16:54
- 743 of 1180
he rang the company according to him on the darkside
zscrooge
- 12 Dec 2006 20:56
- 744 of 1180
latest over-hyped ramped dog
KEAYDIAN
- 12 Dec 2006 21:48
- 746 of 1180
Can I smell something?
potatohead
- 13 Dec 2006 09:33
- 747 of 1180
I smell news..
smiler o
- 13 Dec 2006 09:38
- 748 of 1180
Yes pothead, have been over and had a read ! we will see :)
potatohead
- 13 Dec 2006 09:44
- 749 of 1180
I smell news..
KEAYDIAN
- 13 Dec 2006 09:45
- 750 of 1180
I smell Bull.