<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cell Therapeutics Teeters on the Brink as Cash Runs Out on Promising Cancer Drugs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/02/13/cell-therapeutics-teeters-on-the-brink-as-cash-runs-out-on-promising-cancer-drugs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/02/13/cell-therapeutics-teeters-on-the-brink-as-cash-runs-out-on-promising-cancer-drugs/</link>
	<description>Business + Technology in the Exponential Economy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:54:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cell Therapeutics: The MJ of Biotech &#124; IguanaBio - A Daily Biotech and Pharma Tabloid - Gossip, News, Research, Humor and Updates on the Latest Events in Biotech and Pharma - Unique, Insightful, Truthful, Sometimes Sneaky</title>
		<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/02/13/cell-therapeutics-teeters-on-the-brink-as-cash-runs-out-on-promising-cancer-drugs/comment-page-1/#comment-67485</link>
		<dc:creator>Cell Therapeutics: The MJ of Biotech &#124; IguanaBio - A Daily Biotech and Pharma Tabloid - Gossip, News, Research, Humor and Updates on the Latest Events in Biotech and Pharma - Unique, Insightful, Truthful, Sometimes Sneaky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:16:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xconomy.com/?p=12612#comment-67485</guid>
		<description>[...] has been riddled in controversy for years. As Xconomy said, there was the corporate jet issues, Bianco using CTIC funds, a failed boardroom coup against [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] has been riddled in controversy for years. As Xconomy said, there was the corporate jet issues, Bianco using CTIC funds, a failed boardroom coup against [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MedCity morning read, Monday, Feb. 16 : MedCity News</title>
		<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/02/13/cell-therapeutics-teeters-on-the-brink-as-cash-runs-out-on-promising-cancer-drugs/comment-page-1/#comment-46512</link>
		<dc:creator>MedCity morning read, Monday, Feb. 16 : MedCity News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:25:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xconomy.com/?p=12612#comment-46512</guid>
		<description>[...] Cell Therapeutics teeters on the brink as cash runs out on promising cancer drugs(Xconomy) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Cell Therapeutics teeters on the brink as cash runs out on promising cancer drugs(Xconomy) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: clambottler</title>
		<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/02/13/cell-therapeutics-teeters-on-the-brink-as-cash-runs-out-on-promising-cancer-drugs/comment-page-1/#comment-46201</link>
		<dc:creator>clambottler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:28:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xconomy.com/?p=12612#comment-46201</guid>
		<description>&quot;The company now hopes shareholders will approve a transaction at a Feb. 27 meeting that will clear much of the debt off its books, Bianco says.&quot;

I have heard that they have recently submitted a shareholder meeting request for an additional 400 million authorized shares together with an up to 1 share for 20 reverse split.  Is the transaction you refer to ?  

So if they authorize another 400 million shares and then do a reverse split that will clear up the debt ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“The company now hopes shareholders will approve a transaction at a Feb. 27 meeting that will clear much of the debt off its books, Bianco says.”</p>
<p>I have heard that they have recently submitted a shareholder meeting request for an additional 400 million authorized shares together with an up to 1 share for 20 reverse split.  Is the transaction you refer to ?  </p>
<p>So if they authorize another 400 million shares and then do a reverse split that will clear up the debt ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: clambottler</title>
		<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/02/13/cell-therapeutics-teeters-on-the-brink-as-cash-runs-out-on-promising-cancer-drugs/comment-page-1/#comment-46193</link>
		<dc:creator>clambottler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:56:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xconomy.com/?p=12612#comment-46193</guid>
		<description>I find it strange that you choose these words  &quot;What’s striking is that Cell Therapeutics is sitting on two drugs for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma that are on the cusp of critical milestones that could turn them into moneymaking products.&quot;

RIT owns Zevalin.  CTIC has a 50 % stake in Zevalin; Spectrum owns the other 50 %.  CTIC has negotiated an option to sell their 50 % stake to Spectrum for 18 million dollars.  And I believe you will find Biogen is still owed Royalty and Milestone.  

I do not know if that is &quot;sitting&quot; on a drug.  Perhaps it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find it strange that you choose these words  “What’s striking is that Cell Therapeutics is sitting on two drugs for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma that are on the cusp of critical milestones that could turn them into moneymaking products.”</p>
<p>RIT owns Zevalin.  CTIC has a 50 % stake in Zevalin; Spectrum owns the other 50 %.  CTIC has negotiated an option to sell their 50 % stake to Spectrum for 18 million dollars.  And I believe you will find Biogen is still owed Royalty and Milestone.  </p>
<p>I do not know if that is “sitting” on a drug.  Perhaps it is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: clambottler</title>
		<link>http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/02/13/cell-therapeutics-teeters-on-the-brink-as-cash-runs-out-on-promising-cancer-drugs/comment-page-1/#comment-46192</link>
		<dc:creator>clambottler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xconomy.com/?p=12612#comment-46192</guid>
		<description>You fail to mention all the previously terminated trials of pixantrone; here are a few:

Terminated  Fludarabine, Pixantrone and Rituximab vs Fludarabine and Rituximab forRelapsed or Refractory Indolent NHL  
 
Terminated  Comparative Trial for Pixantrone in Combination With Rituximab in Indolent Non-Hodgkin&#039;s Lymphoma  

Terminated  A Trial in Patients With Diffuse Large-B-Cell Lymphoma Comparing Pixantrone Against Doxorubicin 

You fail to mention the &quot;current&quot; EXTEND trial that you speak so highly of is a SPA trial designed for 320 patients.

Estimated Enrollment: 320 
Study Start Date: July 2004 

While mentioning 140 patients in the current trial (when viewing design and power you may notice less then 1/2 were enrolled) --- I believe CTIC had mentioned that 97 were evaluable.  So you have less then 1/2 to 1/3 the evaluable patients.  How do you think that will effect the power ?

Finally you might want to review the fact that I believe it was 140 patients enrolled in 130 centers; worldwide.  In my opinion 1 patient per trial site leaves room for questions; and perhaps should be looked at with a hard eye.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You fail to mention all the previously terminated trials of pixantrone; here are a few:</p>
<p>Terminated  Fludarabine, Pixantrone and Rituximab vs Fludarabine and Rituximab forRelapsed or Refractory Indolent NHL  </p>
<p>Terminated  Comparative Trial for Pixantrone in Combination With Rituximab in Indolent Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma  </p>
<p>Terminated  A Trial in Patients With Diffuse Large-B-Cell Lymphoma Comparing Pixantrone Against Doxorubicin </p>
<p>You fail to mention the “current” EXTEND trial that you speak so highly of is a SPA trial designed for 320 patients.</p>
<p>Estimated Enrollment: 320<br />
Study Start Date: July 2004 </p>
<p>While mentioning 140 patients in the current trial (when viewing design and power you may notice less then 1/2 were enrolled) — I believe CTIC had mentioned that 97 were evaluable.  So you have less then 1/2 to 1/3 the evaluable patients.  How do you think that will effect the power ?</p>
<p>Finally you might want to review the fact that I believe it was 140 patients enrolled in 130 centers; worldwide.  In my opinion 1 patient per trial site leaves room for questions; and perhaps should be looked at with a hard eye.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

