“This Tiny, Unknown Biotech is About to Unleash Its ‘Holy Grail’ Drug”

Biotech Supertrader teases that "This May be the Most Radical Advance in Medicine in the Last 100 Years"

By Travis Johnson, Stock Gumshoe, January 8, 2014

Irregulars Quick Take Paid members get a quick summary of the stocks teased and our thoughts here. Join as a Stock Gumshoe Irregular today (already a member? Log in)

Robert Morris is helming a biotech-focused stock newsletter that’s called Biotech Supertrader (modesty has no place in the world of newsletter promotions, of course), and I’ve never covered this letter before so I thought I ought to have a look at the latest teaser we’ve been asked about.

Morris, incidentally, has been featured in our pages before — but that was back when he was editor of China Stock Insider at the same publisher. That letter, like almost all China-focused investment newsletters, seems to have disappeared quietly into that good night … which probably tells you that it’s time to invest in China again, since the newsletter publishers are ignoring the Middle Kingdom and rushing out their pitches about biotech and tech stocks. At the time, Morris was teasing NQ Mobile (NQ), which has turned out to be pretty good if you bought it down there in the $6-8 neighborhood (though it’s been a wild ride).

So now what’s he pitching for his Biotech Supertrader?

Well, the destruction of “Man’s deadliest disease”, of course. Here’s how the teaser gets our attention:

“This Tiny, Unknown Biotech is About to Unleash Its ‘Holy Grail’ Drug on Man’s Deadliest Disease

“Their ‘Guided Missile Approach’ Could Save Thousands of Lives Each Year

“It’s about to become the most talked about advancement in cancer treatment in our lifetimes and you can lock in a life-transforming fortune if you act quickly….

“I’m urging my subscribers to load up on this stock NOW….

“I’ve just uncovered a tiny, unknown biotechnology company with a new cancer drug in phase 3 clinical trials which is showing remarkable success at treating several types of cancer.

“Their scientists have found an innovative approach to cancer care which involves a breakthrough in treatment. It goes deep inside the inner workings of our cells.

“Plus, this medicine looks to be many times more effective and with fewer side effects than the chemo, radiation, and drug therapies currently available.”

If there’s one thing that investors know can make them rich and make them feel good about themselves and the world, it’s a cure for cancer — we’ve seen that effective cancer treatments can and do (occasionally) turn little biotech stocks into gigantic successes, so the dream lives on that you’re going to catch one of these lottery tickets and own the next Genentech. Will we be so lucky? Well, let’s see which one he’s pitching:

“When this drug wins FDA approval – which I believe it will – this small company’s $4.16 stock price will go straight to the moon.

“And the market for this drug is absolutely huge!

“You see, this small biotech is targeting its new drug, let’s call it ‘drug S’, at cancers of the blood and bone marrow. And it is already in very promising phase 3 trials for these two types of cancer.

“But here’s where it gets really interesting. It looks like the drug this company is developing will also work on other types of cancer!

“There are positive signs it works on Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) too. There are 1.1 million people with this type of malignancy. Just in the United States alone there are over 300,000 patients with this disease according to The American Cancer Society. Each desperate for a cure.

“Plus it looks like ‘drug S’ may turn out to be an effective treatment for ovarian Cancer. There are more than 204,000 new cases of ovarian cancer diagnosed worldwide each year with 22,280 of these in the United States according to the National Cancer Institute estimates.”

So … who is it? Thinkolator sez this is Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals (CYCC)

Cyclacel is indeed a little biotech around $4 (it closed at $4.35 yesterday), with a market capitalization of only about $80 million — so be careful, we’re a big enough group here that if just a small percentage of Stock Gumshoe readers got enthused about this stock it could drive the shares up, less than a million dollars worth of shares trade each day (Biotech Supertrader says they limited their readership to 750 people — I don’t know if that’s still their cap or if they’ve hit it, but we’ll have more folks than that reading this free article).

And like many biotech stocks, it’s got some impressive scientists and it’s been losing money for a long time as they’ve been searching for a viable drug (their current lead drug also was a big focus of theirs back when it was in Phase 1 trials five or more years ago, so that’s a good reminder of the time these things take, it’s just starting Phase 3 trials now). It looks like they must have gone public in 2004, when they were about eight years old, and a quick scan of ten years of their financials over at Morningstar indicates that they’ve never generated more than a token amount of revenue (meaning, they’ve probably had some research collaboration payments or partnership funding, but never got a product to market), and have accumulated more than $250 million in losses to date. And had two reverse splits to keep the price from sinking far into penny territory.

So that’s not unusual, but it means that — as with all developmental-stage biotechs — it’s not about the financials or the fundamentals, it’s about what’s going to happen in their clinical trials and whether things are going well enough that they can continue to finance the trials … which get much more expensive as you progress through Phase 2 and Phase 3.

All I know about them so far is that they say they’ve got enough cash to get through enrollment in their key Phase 3 study for “drug S” (which is sapacitabine) as of September when they last updated their investor presentation, but I know nothing about the science or the competing cancer drugs that are out there or how fabulous this particular one might be, so I asked our favorite medical writer, Doc Gumshoe (who, yes, is not a doctor) to check them out quickly and chime in. Here’s what he could share after looking into them for a few minutes (he’s just looking at the medical stuff, not so much the “investor presentations”):

    Cyclacel’s Prospects

    Cyclacel has three drugs in development at this time, and is involved in eight clinical trials with these drugs, not including two clinical trials that have been terminated. Their top contender is sapacitabine which targets the division of cancer cells. If you can prevent cancer cells from dividing and reproducing, you have the cancer whipped, so targeting cancer cell division (or mitosis, which is the technical term) is a highly promising avenue for treating cancer. However, we need to take note of the fact that sapacitabine is one of a large number of drugs that propose to fight cancer by this method.

    At present, all eight of Cyclacel’s clinical trials involve sapacitabine. Of these, at least one has been completed – a Phase 1 study of the safety and pharmacology of the drug. Four others are current, with no information about results. These are likely Phase 1 or small Phase 2 studies, to assess safety, determine what a correct dose might be, and evaluate whether the drug does what it’s supposed to do in human subjects with the target diseases, which in this case include acute myeloid leukemia (AML), cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, and some advanced solid tumors. Prior to the clinical trials, sapacitabine has demonstrated impressive results in delaying the spread of metastatic liver cancers in mice.

    From what I can gather from public sources (i.e., the NIH Clinical Trials Registry), there is one Phase 3 trial, which started recruiting patients in February of 2013 and is expected to be completed in late 2015. The trial is in elderly patients with AML, and compares alternating cycles of sapacitabine and decitabine with decitabine alone. Decitabine (Dacogen) is FDA-approved for treating AML and also targets cancer cells’ replication by attacking their DNA.

    It is possible that the Phase 3 trial by itself could lead to FDA approval for sapacitabine, depending on the strength of the results. However, that trial would not get the drug approved for use as monotherapy, since it is not being investigated as monotherapy. My guess is that Cyclacel is planning more trials of sapacitabine as monotherapy, perhaps in younger patients. And my further guess is that FDA approval is still quite a long way off.

    Sapacitabine is also in a Phase 3 trial with cyclophosphamide and rituximab for the treatment of relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Cyclophosphamide (marketed under several trade names) is a well-established chemotherapy agent used in a number of cancers, and has led to remission in many cases; however, it is associated with truly harrowing adverse effects. Rituximab (Rituxan, Genentech) is used not only in cancers but in some autoimmune diseases. And sapacitabine is also being studied in patients with previously-treated non-small-cell lung cancers.

    Although the piece from Biotech Supertrader said that the drug – identified as “drug S” –is also a promising treatment for ovarian cancer, I find no clue that it is being studied in such patients. [ed note: that’s because that “promise” is in the lab still, not in people — they had a press release about this in the Fall, “75% of Ovarian Cancer Patient Samples Highly Sensitive to Sapacitabine”, not studied in patients but on patient samples]

    Cyclacel has two other drugs in development: selicilib and a drug designated as CYC116. One selicilib study has been terminated, and in a second Phase 1 study, selicilib is used with sapacitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors. Remember, however, that Phase 1 studies are many rungs of the ladder below what’s needed to gain FDA approval.

    CYC116 is an aurora kinase inhibitor, meaning that it blocks the action of an intracellular enzyme that facilitates cancer cell mitosis. This is a promising avenue of cancer treatment, however, the traffic on this avenue is fairly heavy, and includes several other classes of drugs including tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and taxol based agents such as paclitaxel (Taxol, Bristol Myers Squibb); docetaxel (Taxotere, Sanofi-Aventis), Abraxane (a newer formulation of paclitaxel from Celgene) and others.

    CYC116 supposedly also inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which induces the growth of blood vessels that nourish cancer cells. Inhibiting VEGF is a well-established means of combating cancer, and CYC116 could hardly be characterized as a radically new departure in cancer treatment.

    The one trial involving this agent has been terminated. That, of course, does not mean that development of CYC116 stops dead in its tracks – there are many reasons why a trial can be terminated, and ours is not to speculate without more information.

    Beyond those three drugs, it’s hard to guess what Cyclacel may have up its corporate sleeve. It is certainly true that a successful cancer drug – even if only moderately successful– can be transformational for the biotech that develops the drug. But the drugs that Cyclacel has under development do not appear to this skeptical observer to be radically new departures in cancer treatment.

    It’s important to remember, when trying to estimate the likelihood of a single drug demonstrating sufficient efficacy and safety to gain FDA approval and market share, that the competitive field is vast. As I mentioned earlier, Cyclacel has a total of 8 clinical trials in process at this time.

    For the sake of perspective, it’s worth knowing that at present there are 41,445 cancer trials being conducted. So those are the odds.

So there you have it — it’s almost impossible to find a development-stage biotech whose financials look great or that makes your heart go pit-a-pat over their valuation, especially in a biotech bull market like we’ve seen over the past year or so, and Cyclacel doesn’t jump out as spectacular on that front either, not unless you’re a big believer in the promise of their specific drug. They’re a small stock and they don’t get much attention, other than from the analysts who probably helped them sell shares in secondary offerings in recent years, and there aren’t any major “skin in the game” insiders as far as I can tell (the CEO owns $1 million worth of shares, but he gets paid more than that every year), and there’s only one really focused owner on the institutional side that seems to have any kind of biotech focus (Eastern Capital owns about 7% of the shares, roughly $5 million worth … don’t know much about them).

So I don’t see a lot to make them stand out other than Robert Morris’ apparent enthusiasm for the shares (which certainly goes over the top, he calls his special report “The End of Cancer Worries Forever“), and I don’t know enough about the science to be a believer (though, to be fair, I almost never speculate on developmental biotechs because they’re so hit-driven and I’m not smart enough to be a hit-picker in the sector). It is at least encouraging that they are enrolling patients for Phase 3, and that they probably won’t have to raise more money before they have some indication of how the trial is going, but sometime in the next year or two they’re probably going to have to either get good results from this trial that let them raise cash at a good price, or have promising enough results that some big pharma company wants to jump in and help fund development of “drug S” (or just buy up the whole company, as happens with some regularity when a little biotech gets promising results).

Oh, and they are presenting at an investor conference next week, so maybe they’ll have something interesting to share then. As you can tell, this one doesn’t jump into my cup of tea … but these kinds of stocks almost never do. Sound interesting to you? Interested in the science or the lottery-ticket possibilities of $80-million developmental biotechs? Have any experience with Robert Morris or know whether or not we should consider him a biotech savant? Let us know with a comment below.

Share Your Thoughts

ShowHide Comments (2,685)
    1. Jo McIntyre
      Mar 13 2014, 01:01:05 pm

      Well, I guess that’s it then. Goodby all – I’ll try to find you on the other threads. This has been a great ride in so many ways. Thanks to all of you who contributed so much to our medical and investment knowledge, including, of course, Dr. KSS!

    2. 17335 |
      Dr. KSS, MD PhD
      Dr. KSS, MD PhD
      Mar 13 2014, 07:07:12 pm

      to HarleyDLS; Thanks for writing. The ill effects from interferon and ribavirin can be quite bad. But it is impossible to be healthy and have HCV and I feel the NIH’s stance is very much in error. Even without cirrhosis, HCV patients have 12 times the death rate of the uninfected. HCV clearly directly causes non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma. A third of patients with it develop essential mixed cryoglobulinemia. Nearly all patients with it have depression because serotonin metabolites are found to be low in CSF. A host of other complications arise from it as well, such as PCT and Mooren corneal ulcers. And it is contagious to others.

      You did not state your genotype, but it is probably type 1. Sofosbuvir can be used in combo with IFN and ribavirin or with ribavirin alone, but would not work for type 1 in the case of the latter. Sofosbuvir is Sovaldi. Olysio (simeprevir) only works in combo with IFN and ribavirin and only for genotype 1 (probably OK for type 4) Sofosbuvir is pan-genotypic. Sofosbuvir and simeprevir probably do have high efficacy in combo for genotype 1 but have not been formally studied for that and are not so FDA approved, so no third party payer will cover that. I feel third party payers will catch on, but they are balking at Sovaldi, which is basically $1000/pill.

      I would suggest that you wait til two compatible oral agents are approved and covered. But you most definitely need treatment. The consequence of cryoglobulinemia is renal failure. The virus is highly etiologic for cancer. Quality of life for patients with HIV has been formally compared to that for patients with HCV, and it is far far worse in HCV.

      So while Olysio and Sovaldi can be taken without interferon, they are no good for genotype 1 without interferon (if you were on Incivek, you must be gt 1). There are definitely patients such as those with seizures and bipolar disorder and psoriatic arthritis who absolutely no matter what cannot do interferon. But in your case you need combination therapy with two oral drugs when such a combo is approved and covered (a year from now). Keep in mind that since you were exposed to treatment, virus has been driven to mutate, to elaborate quasi species, so any IFN regimen even if you were on antidepressants and could tolerate it would be fruitless. If you are being asked to do twice yearly ultrasounds….I wonder why? Do you have advanced fibrosis?? Are you cirrhotic?

      • 345 |
        Denis Smalley
        Denis Smalley
        Apr 4 2014, 10:17:22 am

        Hi Dr. KSS,

        Many thanks for your response. You are correct in your assumptions that I have genotype 1a. I have not had a biopsy in about 8 – 9 years, but the last one showed no fibrosis and only mild steatosis. I am not cirrhotic and most of the symptoms I suffer are depression, itchyness, insomnia, and fatigue. I am unsure why they started the ultrasounds but that routine started after I failed to complete the Int-Rib-Incivek combination therapy in Oct. 2012. So far, all the ultrasounds have shown is a couple of cysts that the PA described to me as bubbles of fat, nothing to be worried about. My blood work has been reasonably normal with the outliers being occasional slightly elevated ALT and low Vitamin D. Have been seeing the Doc’s PA since we tried treatment and since he left recently, I am unable to ask him why the ultrasounds but will ask the PA when I go for my next visit in May.

        I definitely want to get rid of the virus as I know it is a time bomb. I know I have had it since around 1992 and probably acquired it late 70’s or early 80’s. I’ve been lucky. The reason I stopped the prior treatment is it was causing me to be psychotic and I was afraid I would end up hurting someone or myself. I was feeling quite crazy but sane enough, I suppose, to recognize it. I have asked to be placed on any Phase 3 or 4 clinical trial that does not include Interferon but so far nothing has come along. I am hoping I stay healthy until the non-interferon treatments are available. Are there any physicians in the DC area you know and can recommend? Since my doc just left his practice in February, I would like to move to someone who knows their stuff instead of just gambling that the docs who take on his patients are top shelf. The only thing I know about them is that they are affiliated with Georgetown Hospital. Any guidance would be appreciated.

        By the way, I just signed on as an Irregular because in part, I think you are a great addition to Gumshoe and want to thank you for that as well as the generous advice you give herein.

      • 57 |
        Gary Stoltz
        Jul 2 2015, 11:53:46 pm

        I was HepC positive 1A for over 10 years and non-responsive to ribavarin and interferon and suffered many side effects such as peripheral neuropathy, PCT, and vascular problems to both legs and feet along with other problems. I took Olysio and Solvaldi and was undetectable after 14 days and have remained that way since last April. If I can provide any info please e-mail me at Extet@aol.com

        • 17335 |
          Dr. KSS, MD PhD
          Dr. KSS, MD PhD
          Jul 3 2015, 10:33:28 am

          Wow, sounds like you had cryoglobulinemia Gary, which could have killed your kidneys, but should now be gone. I am happy you are cured. PCT is truly hellish, as you know, and is also a way that infected people also spread virus. I hope all your suffering is over, Gary, and that you are all-around well. I know you got body-slammed by the failed PEG-IFN-alpha/RBV course. Thanks for writing in.

          • 158 |
            Oct 10 2015, 04:36:06 pm

            Hey Doc

            I also am IA HCV positive since late 70s detected in the 90s.
            I finally took the recent test for the new drugs and United health denied me because of no Cirrhosis of the liver and that I am not showing signs of illness.
            That is so wrong.

    3. John Pillinger
      Mar 20 2014, 11:27:49 am

      Navigation is becoming a problem for me, could someone put up some links to the threads/blogs/articles that are replacing this one please.


      • John Pillinger
        Mar 20 2014, 11:34:26 am

        Bizarre coincidence, a strange date order of posts here, but found my request now follows a post with the answer to my question. A good coincidence!


    4. Brandon
      Mar 21 2014, 12:54:16 am

      Some posts ago, I mentioned having done some DD into ISR, IsoRay, and found their technology quite sound. Unfortunately, there was not much follow up enthusiasm. Well, I was able to get in at 1.1 and sold at 3.5 yesterday…just to show there are still some undiscovered gems around…now my next target is ELTP. It has a proprietary technology on abuse deterrent pain medicine. Stay tuned…

    5. Brandon
      Mar 21 2014, 12:56:44 am

      (re-post) Some posts ago, I mentioned having done some DD into ISR, IsoRay, and found their technology quite sound. Unfortunately, there was not much follow up enthusiasm. Well, I was able to get in at 1.1 and sold at 3.5 yesterday…just to show there are still some undiscovered gems around…now my next target is ELTP. It has a proprietary technology on abuse deterrent pain medicine. Stay tuned…

    6. 168 |
      Mar 21 2014, 08:57:51 pm

      Brandon, MJ, John Pillinger please see jer-vic reply at #308 (#1308). This thread is virtually inactive now and has been split into two, one requires a $49. membership (irregulars) and the other is free.

    7. 17335 |
      Dr. KSS, MD PhD
      Dr. KSS, MD PhD
      Apr 3 2014, 05:39:23 pm

      One born every minute Scott Postma. Good luck! (You’ll need it.) I know things about this company you clearly don’t, and if you want to join us on the irregulars, and also not be ad hominem, I will be happy to speak with you. But here I have nothing more to say to you. Life is too short to remediate the foolish and tutor the willfully naive.

      • Scott Postma
        Apr 3 2014, 06:24:36 pm

        Let me explain the reason for my comment. I am new to the different biotech message boards. I have browsed Yahoo message boards, investors hub message boards and now stock gumshoe message boards. Yahoo message boards clearly has the least credible posts on it. When I saw your comment about doctors not want to use multikine with even with FDA approval, my mind went to the Yahoo-type message board post.
        I can see that you are well educated and of course the doctor. Could you please explain to me the rationale as to why doctors would not use multikine even with FDA approval? It seems to me that a drug that can offer 10% increased survival would be significant and patients would demand it.

    8. 17335 |
      Dr. KSS, MD PhD
      Dr. KSS, MD PhD
      Apr 3 2014, 06:40:01 pm

      Scott Postma: your lack of information and unwillingness merely to join the irregulars where I have posted about this stock DEFINITELY is not an emergency on my part, and if you think I am going to devote my precious time to respond personally to you here after you have barged in shoving elbows and stirring up trouble and lashing out at me, well dream on. If you want to (1) APOLOGIZE, (2) come to the Irregulars, and (3) show yourself not to be a bombastic self-centered lout, then I will communicate with you. You’ll catch way more flies with honey than with vinegar Scott Postma. But I will not interact with you further here. Life is WAY too short for your drama. What are you, an elephant in must??

      • Scott Postma
        Apr 3 2014, 07:08:23 pm

        Okay. I am new to this site. I have updated some of my info. I did not mean to make a comment that was taken offensively. For that, I am sorry.
        I am here to learn all I can about cel-sci and their drug.
        I would appreciate it if you could explain why doctors would not use multikine even with FDA approval? Thanks.

        • Alan Harris
          Apr 4 2014, 05:16:50 am

          Scott: try ctrF CVM. Theres mention here and on Eyes and Ears and Nash threads. One comment says….I would hold it at arms length between thumb and forefinger….It stinks.

          • Scott Postma
            Apr 4 2014, 08:52:43 am

            Thanks. I did that. It is the first thing I do when I don’t see Cel-Sci in the head lines.
            Unfortunately I don’t have access to the Nash threads.
            I read what KSS said earlier but got completely distracted when he said “Even if the product is approved, physcians will never ever use it.” I am not a doctor but this seemed to be a bizarre statement. Therefore I asked KSS how this could possibly be? I am still waiting for an answer.

            • Alan Harris
              Apr 4 2014, 01:20:33 pm

              I have a sneaking suspicion you will get no further answer. He is a doctor so we must assume he knows what doctors like and dislike generally. As we are not doctors, we must either accept he knows best or ask someone else coz he will not suddenly have a change of heart ! Im sorry you dont have access to the other thread coz your missing some great stuff. $49 sees a small price to pay. Good luck with your investment and I hope you succeed in saying ‘I told you so…..’ Let me know.
              Heres a couple of snippets :
              A company that seems to have similar problems as PTN is CVM (CEL-SCI Corp) that you mentioned only one time as example of very bad management. They made a reverse split 1-10 and that’s what I am left with. Not very pleasant.
              Make no mistake about it: there are bottom feeder companies run by mucks who know how to pretend to be running pharma and have no intention of ever succeeding or getting to clinical efficacy. PVCT, LJPC, CVM, are the worst examples of these, always in pursuit, but will never come up with data to move something truly ahead. To succeed would be to take the company somewhere that these CEO’s know nothing about. Many of these companies are terrified of true success because that would cause scrutiny, papers, reporters. So they string people along for decades in some cases with lukewarm but not definitive trials.
              And as for CVM….just watch. I predict a surprising number of patients are going to be “lost to follow-up” in their studies as a way of burying the fact that Multikine does nothing and in fact IS nothing. Some of these tumors will “respond” if you pop a few cc’s of saline into them.
              One other thing, CVM has what i might call a KSS ratio of >1. Its short interest exceeds its institutional ownership.
              cVM is a deadbeat company this has been idle for many years and will continue to be so. They are promulgating a potion, a “compound,” and relying purely on the word of places that have NO business doing clinical studies to assess efficacy. It horrifies me. What they are doing is utterly unethical. Just watch: phase III will be “promising,” but ah, MORE studies will be needed, on and on, forever. They have NO goal of getting this to market. Their goal is to make it to yet another cap raise and swindle some more naive investors. They will be “always in pursuit” for the next 15 years, just watch. Their goal is to remain a little company in a wee Virginian sleepy town of 20,000, a cloister of fellow traveling crooks paying themselves well. They have no intention of succeeding, because success requires transparency and accountability. They will continue a study shellgame. And let’s just suppose for a minute that their is a legitimate blend of cytokines in Multikine. That is nonsense. For every pro-immune responsive cytokine there are one or two anti-immune responsive ones. I sincerely call on the FDA to shut this claptrap enterprise down.
              I have no position in CVM, but would not dream of taking one. And keep in mind that just because a company is illegitimate does not mean its price will not go up. Dead cats bounce sometimes, and the world is full of sucker investors. But here at Gumshoe I think we are about identifying companies with good reasons to be in them. People should do what their gut and conscience say, but in my view a throw of a dart would find you a better company to be in than CVM.
              And theres plenty more where that comes from. BFN

            • Scott Postma
              Apr 4 2014, 02:02:21 pm

              Alan – thanks for the reply. They are improving. I really do appreciate it.
              You are right, reverse splits hurt. No doubt about that.
              You say “but they will never some up with any real data”. I don’t know if you saw my other post so I will repeat it here. Phase 2 had very good data and the company also followed up with the patients after 3.5 years to get a survival rate of 66%. Yes, the sample size was small. Here is a link to the jounal. http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/23/15/3421.full
              I find its bizarre that you say some companies are terrified of of succeeding. I have never heard a statement like that. Maybe that’s true, but seems odd. I would not put Cel-Sci in the category because all of their recent actions suggest they are going to finish Phase 3.
              As for your prediction that a surprising number of patients are going to be “lost to followup”. If that is Cel-Sci’s plan, they really messed up by partnering with the largest oncology company in the US (21st Century Oncology). Plus they even issued a press release about it to tell everyone about their trial thereby making it very easy for people to remember to ask them about followups. I think that their plan of secretly loosing patient data is doomed.
              As far as some tumors responding if you pop a few cc’s of saline into them: by “respond” do you mean completely disappear? Saline solution does that?
              Yes – the short interest is high but that doens’t mean they are right. Just ask how David Einhorns his bearish bet on GMCR turned out after the company decided to partner with Coca-Cola.
              Again you state Cel-Sci is relying on the word of places that have no business doing clinical studies to assess efficacy. But again, 21st Century Oncology seems to be a good company to partner with. In addition to that, they have also partnered with the Arizona Cancer Research Alliance.
              I agree that it is wise to identify good companies, but to post phrases like “illegitimate”, “what they are going is unethical” and “company run by mucks” without providing solid facts, does not build credibility in ones argument. I know this is the final conclusion you have in your mind, but I can’t see how you make that determination based on the your statements. Then again, maybe it’s me and I am missing something.
              I hope the good dialogue continues.

            • Alan Harris
              Apr 4 2014, 02:27:45 pm

              No Scott, ‘I’ dont say!!……..I simply cut and pasted comment to save you the $49 irregs subscription fee as you seem soooo reluctant to cough up. In short…. I was trying to do you a favour. But you must remember: while youre interest maybe CVM, KSS has diss’ed it….thats end of story on GS. If you cant accept that….tough! Life moves on here even if it doesnt there. GL

      • 345 |
        Denis Smalley
        Denis Smalley
        Apr 4 2014, 05:53:00 pm

        Thanks Dr. KSS. Since I upgraded my Gumshoe account, I’ve been reading the NASH post and trying to get caught up. The amount of information coming through these channels is mind blowing. Definitely look forward to hearing your thoughts. There are may folks here that are grateful for your time and insight. Count me as one of them!

    9. 661 |
      Apr 14 2014, 10:05:42 am

      Disappearing rows on spreadsheet have been due to someone filtering the data. If we hover over the filter icon and it says turn off filter then click on it and the rows missing will reappear . Those that want to filter should pull a copy down to their own machine to do so.
      Those that are superior to the rest of us may continue to filter the original at will.

    10. 30 |
      Gerald Galanowsky
      May 23 2014, 11:44:24 am

      DRTX is set for an FDA Decision on 5/26/14, but of course that date is a holiday……DRTX has not shown much positive movement ………any interpretations? Thank You!

    11. Lawrence
      Oct 1 2014, 09:37:51 pm

      My name is Lawrence, I am from U.K. I want to share my testimonies to the general public on how this great man called Dr Osas cure my sister from Genetic Herpes with the herbal medication gotten from dr. osas, he cures other diseases too herbal is a great medication. To hell with the government and their insane policy, he have a medication that is hundred percent assured to cure genital herpes and you don’t need to spend so much money on anymore . I want you to contact dr Osas on: doctorosasherbalhome@gmail.com My family is now a brand new one, so stop your worries and go get your medication and set the family free of the deadly disease that hold no respect to family harmony. Thank you for reading my comment.

      1. HERPES
      2. LASSA FEVER
      3. GONORRHEA
      4. HIV/AIDS
      7. EPILEPSY
      8. ASEPSIS
      9. CANCER
      14. Male menopause
      15. Menopause – male
      16. Menopause – peri
      17. Menstruation problems
      18. Mercury Poisoning
      19. Migraine
      20. Miscarriage
      21. Mites (demodex mites)
      22. Mites (scabies mites)
      23. Motion sickness
      24. Mouth ulcer
      25. MRSA
      26. Multiple sclerosis
      27. Muscle cramps
      28. Myodesopsia
      29. Stroke
      30. He can as well cast and remove spell

      • 17335 |
        Dr. KSS, MD PhD
        Dr. KSS, MD PhD
        Oct 11 2014, 03:30:07 pm

        Lawrence, sorry, but you have been grossly deceived. These are fraudulent claims, and if you sister actually had genital herpes, I can assure you she still does and is quite contagious. Re your number 30, you might want to ask him to remove the spell he has put on you. At first I thought your post was a joke, but in fact it is very disquieting. Good of you to name this criminal and provide his email address so that regulators can be notified. You have been badly scammed and cheated. Osas, who is not a doctor, belongs behind bars.

    12. David A
      Jan 4 2015, 11:09:36 am

      This stock is down to .70 cents a share. In or around December 15th, it plunged from $3
      to .70 cents! Anybody know why?

      • 3538 |
        Apr 7 2015, 12:37:38 am

        CCYC-From 12/16/14 comment on Irregular files: down nearly 70 percent today alone. Gummies were warned here that this would happen in February 2014…doesn’t surprise me. Membership has many privileges 😉 Best2ALL!-Benjamin

    What These Icons Mean

    • The user who posted this comment is a Stock Gumshoe Premium Member (also known as an "IRREGULAR").
    • This user regularly writes articles for Stock Gumshoe. They may or may not be the author of the current article.
    • This user's comments have been "liked” by at least a few members of the Stock Gumshoe community.
    • This user has commented widely, with input that has been liked enough to earn a two-thumbs-up rating from other readers.
    • This is the highest rating a user can get. They are among the most respected commentors of our community.