Dear Mr. Feuerstein and Mr. Cramer,
On July 24th, the peer review journal Cancer Cell published an article by Lee et al. entitled Drug Resistance via Feedback Activation of Stat3 in Ocogene-Addicted Cancer Cells. One of the important findings from this paper (see below) is that ponatinib, aka Iclusig, invented and manufactured by Ariad, is highly effective, in in vitro studies, at reducing or nearly eliminating the development of resistant cancer cell colonies when used in combination with first line cancer drugs to treat non-small cell lung cancer, and specifically erlontinib (Tarceva) which is manufactured by Roche.
Which brings me to my question for you:
Given the demonstrated potential of Iclusig to improve first line therapies for lung cancer (and by implication a wide variety of other cancers), as well as early results with AP26113, what is the basis and/or justification for taking a "short" position with ARIA stock? Put differently, given the known evidence about the science of Ariad's products, would a patient "long" position with ARIA be a more rational posture, one that is consistent with the rapidly evolving field of oncology?
With kind regards, and please find more detailed comments on the recent Cancer Cell article below.
TC
New article in Cancer Cell journal re applications of Ponatinib (Iclusig)
Short Version: There is new evidence of the dramatic potential (from in vitro studies) to use Iclusig in combination with other drugs to treat a wide variety of cancers, in particular lung cancer. This has important implications for the future of Ariad, and it leads me to believe this is not a $6.0 stock in the long run - it is large multiples of that.
Long Version: An article was published in Cancer Cell, a peer review oncology journal, about the biological pathways the lead to the development of resistance to drugs which target cancers, in particular erlontinib (Tarveca) which is used to treat advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To find the article (and you will have to pay $31.50 to get it), google "Cancer Cell, Drug Resistance via Feedback Activation of Stat3." This article is written for biochemists, which I am not. However, what I surmise is the following.
1. Existing treatments to non-small cell lung cancer, and a variety of other cancers (including colon cancer), are invariably compromised by the emergence of treatment resistant strains of cancer cells.
2. Substantial progress has been made recently to understand the cellular mechanics of the development of resistance strains, in particular the role of Stat3 activation.
3. The article just released, which includes 62 references to Iclusig (ponatinib) highlights the important role that Iclusig (ponatinib) may potentially play in reducing reducing/minimizing treatment resistance (in particular to Traveca, which is relevant for non-small cell lung cancer).
4. The authors summarize the significance of their conclusions by noting that "Pathway targeted drug therapies can effectively promote tumor regression in some patients. However, responses are typically limited in both magnitude and duration, prompting the need for combination treatments to promote longer term clinical benefits...suggesting a co-treatment strategy...may be broadly effective.
On July 24th, the peer review journal Cancer Cell published an article by Lee et al. entitled Drug Resistance via Feedback Activation of Stat3 in Ocogene-Addicted Cancer Cells. One of the important findings from this paper (see below) is that ponatinib, aka Iclusig, invented and manufactured by Ariad, is highly effective, in in vitro studies, at reducing or nearly eliminating the development of resistant cancer cell colonies when used in combination with first line cancer drugs to treat non-small cell lung cancer, and specifically erlontinib (Tarceva) which is manufactured by Roche.
Which brings me to my question for you:
Given the demonstrated potential of Iclusig to improve first line therapies for lung cancer (and by implication a wide variety of other cancers), as well as early results with AP26113, what is the basis and/or justification for taking a "short" position with ARIA stock? Put differently, given the known evidence about the science of Ariad's products, would a patient "long" position with ARIA be a more rational posture, one that is consistent with the rapidly evolving field of oncology?
With kind regards, and please find more detailed comments on the recent Cancer Cell article below.
TC
New article in Cancer Cell journal re applications of Ponatinib (Iclusig)
Short Version: There is new evidence of the dramatic potential (from in vitro studies) to use Iclusig in combination with other drugs to treat a wide variety of cancers, in particular lung cancer. This has important implications for the future of Ariad, and it leads me to believe this is not a $6.0 stock in the long run - it is large multiples of that.
Long Version: An article was published in Cancer Cell, a peer review oncology journal, about the biological pathways the lead to the development of resistance to drugs which target cancers, in particular erlontinib (Tarveca) which is used to treat advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To find the article (and you will have to pay $31.50 to get it), google "Cancer Cell, Drug Resistance via Feedback Activation of Stat3." This article is written for biochemists, which I am not. However, what I surmise is the following.
1. Existing treatments to non-small cell lung cancer, and a variety of other cancers (including colon cancer), are invariably compromised by the emergence of treatment resistant strains of cancer cells.
2. Substantial progress has been made recently to understand the cellular mechanics of the development of resistance strains, in particular the role of Stat3 activation.
3. The article just released, which includes 62 references to Iclusig (ponatinib) highlights the important role that Iclusig (ponatinib) may potentially play in reducing reducing/minimizing treatment resistance (in particular to Traveca, which is relevant for non-small cell lung cancer).
4. The authors summarize the significance of their conclusions by noting that "Pathway targeted drug therapies can effectively promote tumor regression in some patients. However, responses are typically limited in both magnitude and duration, prompting the need for combination treatments to promote longer term clinical benefits...suggesting a co-treatment strategy...may be broadly effective.
My sentiments,This letter should serve as news on yahoo page as much as Adam f new
ReplyDelete