Tag Archives: Gilead Sciences

Ken Fisher Buys Bank Of America, Citigroup, CapitalSource, Gilead Sciences, Tencent

By GuruFocus, Contributor Ken Fisher just reported the second quarter portfolio of his firm, Fisher Asset Management, LLC. As most of times, Ken Fisher is bullish with the stock market. He wrote in his latest Forbes column: “Where are we today? We have one foot planted firmly in skepticism with the other straddling over to optimism. That means we’re about halfway through the bull market–with about four more years to go.” He is also bullish on Canada. …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Forbes Latest

Oral Hepatitis C Cure on Its Way

By Brian Orelli, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Gilead Sciences moved one step closer to an all-oral cure for hepatitis C on Monday when the company submitted its application to the Food and Drug Administration to market sofosbuvir for the viral infection.

The current regimen for patients with hepatitis C involves taking one of two oral drugs — either Merck‘s Victrelis or Vertex Pharmaceuticals‘ Incivek — plus an oral generic called ribavirin and a branded a pegylated interferon drug, either Merck’s PegIntron or Roche‘s Pegasys. Pegylated interferons have to be injected, which patients generally don’t like, and more importantly, they also cause uncomfortable side effects, including flu-like symptoms. Considering they have to be taken for six months or more, it’s understandable why patients don’t like them.

Short-term subdued
Sofosbuvir passed four phase 3 trials. It seems very likely that the FDA will approve the drug in eight to 12 months depending on whether the drug is given a priority review.

But for most hepatitis C patients, sofosbuvir isn’t a cure-all by itself. When the drug is combined with ribavirin, it does a pretty good job at curing patients with genotype 2 and 3, but the most common genotype in the U.S. is genotype 1. Patients with genotype 1, along with genotype 4, 5, and 6, will still have to take PegIntron or Pegasys and ribavirin if sofosbuvir is approved.

While some patients will do just that, many will wait. Hepatitis C is a slow -cting disease. Eventually the virus starts to damage the liver, including potentially causing liver cancer, but it takes a long time to get that far. Most patients can wait for a better treatment.

They’re already doing that. Sales of Incivek and Victrelis peaked shortly not long after their launches as patients wait for better treatments. Sales of sofosbuvir will likely follow the same path. At least initially.

Long-term lucrative
Gilead is testing sofosbuvir in combination with another oral medication, GS-5885, with and without ribavirin in genotype 1 patients. If the phase 3 trials turn out positive, the additional data could be added to the label after it’s approved. Doctors can prescribe it off-label before that, but they’d have to wait for GS-5885 — or a fixed-dose combination pill that contained both medications — to be approved.

How big of a blockbuster sofosbuvir becomes depends on how good the data is compared to other all-oral cocktails being developed by AbbVie , Vertex, Johnson & Johnson , and many others. The cure rates will be important, but as they exceed 90%, safety and the amount of time patients have to take the drug will become more important.

Gilead, for instance, is testing sofosbuvir and GS-5885 with and without ribavirin for eight weeks. Even if it doesn’t beat AbbVie’s all-oral cocktail, which produced a 99% cure rate in one of its phase 2 trials, a shorter time frame might help attract patients.

The other main driver for sales will be how many patients

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Gilead Submits New Drug Application to U.S. FDA for Sofosbuvir for the Treatment of Hepatitis C

By Business Wirevia The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Gilead Submits New Drug Application to U.S. FDA for Sofosbuvir for the Treatment of Hepatitis C


— Sofosbuvir Would Form Basis of First All-Oral Regimen for HCV Genotype 2 and 3 Patients, and Interferon-Sparing Regimen for Genotype 1 Patients —

FOSTER CITY, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Gilead Sciences (NAS: GILD) today announced that the company has submitted a New Drug Application (NDA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of sofosbuvir, a once-daily oral nucleotide analogue for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The data submitted in this NDA support the use of sofosbuvir and ribavirin (RBV) as an all-oral therapy for patients with genotype 2 and 3 HCV infection, and for sofosbuvir in combination with RBV and pegylated interferon (peg-IFN) for treatment-naïve patients with genotype 1, 4, 5 and 6 HCV infection.

Chronic HCV infection affects up to four million Americans, particularly individuals born between 1946 and 1964. The disease is the leading cause of liver cancer and liver transplantation in the United States. Treatment for HCV currently includes 24-48 weeks of therapy with peg-IFN, which has to be injected and is associated with significant side effects, leaving some patients unable to complete therapy. If approved, sofosbuvir would shorten HCV therapy to 12 to 16 weeks, and depending on the genotype, would either eliminate or reduce the duration of peg-IFN injections.

“Current therapies are not suitable for large numbers of patients with HCV infection, and are challenging to take and tolerate,” said John C. Martin, PhD, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Gilead Sciences. “Sofosbuvir’s antiviral potency, safety profile and once-daily administration have the potential to improve cure rates by simplifying and shortening therapy for patients with this disease.”

The sofosbuvir NDA is supported primarily by data from four phase 3 studies, NEUTRINO, FISSION, POSITRON and FUSION, in which 12 or 16 weeks of sofosbuvir-based therapy was found to be superior or non-inferior to currently available treatment options or historical controls, based on the proportion of patients who had a sustained virologic response (HCV undetectable) 12 weeks after completing therapy (SVR12). Patients who achieve SVR12 are considered cured of HCV.

Gilead plans to file for regulatory approval of sofosbuvir in other geographies, including the European Union, in the second quarter of 2013. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Health Care's Sweet 16 Stocks: Gilead vs. Amgen

By David Williamson and Brenton Flynn, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Spring is in the air, and the annual NCAA March Madness college basketball tournament has once again captivated the nation. Of course, that also means Cinderella stories like Florida Gulf Coast have busted brackets of would-be basketball prognosticators.

Here at The Motley Fool, we decided to stick with what we know, trading our basketball picks in for stock picks. We formed our own Sweet 16 filled with the top Big Pharma and Big Biotech stocks in a winner-take-all tournament is determined by the collective intelligence of our CAPS community.

This matchup is a heavyweight bout between Gilead and Amgen. Watch and find out which stock gets eliminated and which will advance to the next round.

What macro trend was Warren Buffett referring to when he said “this is the tapeworm that’s eating at American competitiveness”? Find out in our free report: “What’s Really Eating at America’s Competitiveness.” You’ll also discover an idea to profit as companies work to eradicate this efficiency-sucking tapeworm. Just click here for free, immediate access.

The article Health Care’s Sweet 16 Stocks: Gilead vs. Amgen originally appeared on Fool.com.


Brenton Flynn and David Williamson have no position in any stocks mentioned.
Follow David on Twitter: @MotleyDavid.





The Motley Fool recommends Gilead Sciences. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools don’t all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 – 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

(function(c,a){window.mixpanel=a;var b,d,h,e;b=c.createElement(“script”);
b.type=”text/javascript”;b.async=!0;b.src=(“https:”===c.location.protocol?”https:”:”http:”)+
‘//cdn.mxpnl.com/libs/mixpanel-2.2.min.js’;d=c.getElementsByTagName(“script”)[0];
d.parentNode.insertBefore(b,d);a._i=[];a.init=function(b,c,f){function d(a,b){
var c=b.split(“.”);2==c.length&&(a=a[c[0]],b=c[1]);a[b]=function(){a.push([b].concat(
Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments,0)))}}var g=a;”undefined”!==typeof f?g=a[f]=[]:
f=”mixpanel”;g.people=g.people||[];h=[‘disable’,’track’,’track_pageview’,’track_links’,
‘track_forms’,’register’,’register_once’,’unregister’,’identify’,’alias’,’name_tag’,
‘set_config’,’people.set’,’people.increment’];for(e=0;e<h.length;e++)d(g,h[e]);
a._i.push([b,c,f])};a.__SV=1.2;})(document,window.mixpanel||[]);
mixpanel.init("9659875b92ba8fa639ba476aedbb73b9");

function addEvent(obj, evType, fn, useCapture){
if (obj.addEventListener){
obj.addEventListener(evType, fn, useCapture);
return true;
} else if (obj.attachEvent){
var r = obj.attachEvent("on"+evType, fn);
return r;
}
}

addEvent(window, "load", function(){new FoolVisualSciences();})
addEvent(window, "load", function(){new PickAd();})

var themeName = 'dailyfinance.com';
var _gaq = _gaq || [];
_gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-24928199-1']);
_gaq.push(['_trackPageview']);

(function () {

var ga = document.createElement('script');
…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

What Are the Risks With AbbVie?

By Brenton Flynn, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Among AbbVie‘s biggest risks is significant future uncertainty from two areas. First of all, AbbVie’s current blockbuster drug, Humira, loses patent protection in the U.S. in 2016 and in the EU in 2018. The other source of uncertainty lies in AbbVie’s pipeline, which is focused on a hepatitis C treatment. Its long-term profit potential might not be as much as expected, and the company will likely have to battle rival Gilead Sciences in this new market.

Follow along in the video below as Fool health care bureau chief Brenton Flynn runs through these risks in more detail.

Looking for more details on AbbVie? The Fool’s brand new premium report on the company answers the high-profile questions that AbbVie investors are asking. Simply click here now to claim your copy today.

var FoolAnalyticsData = FoolAnalyticsData || []; FoolAnalyticsData.push({ eventType: “TickerReportPitch”, contentByline: “Brenton Flynn“, contentId: “cms.27333”, contentTickers: “NASDAQ:GILD, NYSE:ABBV”, contentTitle: “What Are the Risks With AbbVie?”, hasVideo: “True”, pitchId: “143”, pitchTickers: “NYSE:ABBV”, pitchTitle: “ABBV Ticker Report” …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

These Blockbusters Have Different Futures for Merck

By Maxxwell A.R. Chatsko, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

The patent cliff has been dealing a slow but painful blow to big pharma over the last several years. It will hit especially hard for Merck this year as it loses major protection for its former mega-blockbuster Singulair in markets across the globe. That raises the stakes for the company’s current product lineup and pending pipeline.

The type 2 diabetes franchise Januvia/Janumet will take over the top spot for Merck in 2013, but growth from those therapies alone won’t be enough to make up for Singulair’s fall. What other top drugs do investors need to watch? Isentress, a first-in-class HIV drug, and Gardasil, the leading HPV vaccine on the market, are two good places to start. However, they may be headed in opposite directions.

Does Isentress have a shot in HIV?
Let’s be honest here. Gilead Sciences is the unquestioned leader in HIV and AIDS therapies, which is backed up by its $8 billion in segment sales last year. The company’s Atripla and Truvada brought in $3.5 billion and $3.2 billion, respectively, in 2012 and are the top two drugs on the market.

The news gets worse for competitors such as Merck. Gilead had Stribild, a four-in-one pill, approved in late August. Sales for the new drug tallied $57.5 million in its first four months on the market, and some analysts think that figure will eventually reach $4.7 billion annually. While sales from Stribild will offset generic competition for its top therapies beginning in 2018, it also offers one huge advantage: convenience. That’s a big, big deal for patients.  

Whereas Merck’s Isentress requires two pills daily, Stribild requires patients to take only one, albeit twice the size. A study evaluating once-daily use of Isentress failed to prove the regimen as effective as the standard twice-daily dosage, effectively dousing hopes for expanded use. Failure aside, the drug is the third best-selling HIV drug behind Gilead’s relentless attack.  

The verdict: Since 2010, Isentress has grown sales nearly 50% to $1.5 billion, which represents the peak sales originally expected when the drug launched. The drug hit the mark earlier than expected, so there may be more room to run, but it will never reach the swagger of Gilead’s top products. Unfortunately for investors, the drug’s best years are likely behind it.

Does anyone know how to gauge this market?
The market for HPV consists of just two therapies: Gardasil from Merck and Cervarix from GlaxoSmithKline . Although it was once hailed as a major competitor to Gardasil, Cervarix netted just $350.54 million in sales in 2012. That is well below Gardasil’s $1.63 billion last year and down markedly from $657 million in 2011. How were early expectations for a neck-and-neck race so off?

Several reasons. First, Gardasil has been shown to protect (primarily) against HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18 whereas its competitor protects against only the latter two. The difference is in disease progression. For instance, HPV types …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

So Far, So Good for Gilead's Blockbuster

By David Williamson, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Some good news came out of Gilead this morning, as the company’s drug Sofosbuvir was deemed safe enough to continue with a critical phase 3 trial. This drug is a vital part of Gilead’s focus on hepatitis C, but this class of drugs has had some safety questions in the past. In the following video, Fool health-care analyst David Williamson tells investors what the key things to watch will be, now that Gilead has gotten the go-ahead to move into this major phase 3 trial.

While you can certainly make huge gains in biotech and pharmaceuticals, the best investing approach is to choose great companies and stick with them for the long term. The Motley Fool’s free report “
3 Stocks That Will Help You Retire Rich
” names stocks that could help you build long-term wealth and retire well, along with some winning wealth-building strategies that every investor should be aware of. 
Click here now
 to keep reading.

The article So Far, So Good for Gilead’s Blockbuster originally appeared on Fool.com.


David Williamson has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Gilead Sciences. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools don’t all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 – 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

(function(c,a){window.mixpanel=a;var b,d,h,e;b=c.createElement(“script”);
b.type=”text/javascript”;b.async=!0;b.src=(“https:”===c.location.protocol?”https:”:”http:”)+
‘//cdn.mxpnl.com/libs/mixpanel-2.2.min.js’;d=c.getElementsByTagName(“script”)[0];
d.parentNode.insertBefore(b,d);a._i=[];a.init=function(b,c,f){function d(a,b){
var c=b.split(“.”);2==c.length&&(a=a[c[0]],b=c[1]);a[b]=function(){a.push([b].concat(
Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments,0)))}}var g=a;”undefined”!==typeof f?g=a[f]=[]:
f=”mixpanel”;g.people=g.people||[];h=[‘disable’,’track’,’track_pageview’,’track_links’,
‘track_forms’,’register’,’register_once’,’unregister’,’identify’,’alias’,’name_tag’,
‘set_config’,’people.set’,’people.increment’];for(e=0;e<h.length;e++)d(g,h[e]);
a._i.push([b,c,f])};a.__SV=1.2;})(document,window.mixpanel||[]);
mixpanel.init("9659875b92ba8fa639ba476aedbb73b9");

function addEvent(obj, evType, fn, useCapture){
if (obj.addEventListener){
obj.addEventListener(evType, fn, useCapture);
return true;
} else if (obj.attachEvent){
var r = obj.attachEvent("on"+evType, fn);
return r;
}
}

addEvent(window, "load", function(){new FoolVisualSciences();})
addEvent(window, "load", function(){new PickAd();})

var themeName = 'dailyfinance.com';
var _gaq = _gaq || [];
_gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-24928199-1']);
_gaq.push(['_trackPageview']);

(function () {

var ga = document.createElement('script');
ga.type = 'text/javascript';
…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Why Idenix Pharmaceuticals Shares Flopped

By Sean Williams, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Although we don’t believe in timing the market or panicking over market movements, we do like to keep an eye on big changes — just in case they’re material to our investing thesis.

What: Shares of hepatitis-C-focused research company Idenix Pharmaceuticals  dipped as much as 16% after the company received an unfavorable initial ruling from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in regards to a patent dispute filed against Gilead Sciences .

So what: The patent dispute — which covers certain 2′-methyl-2′ fluoro nucleoside compounds used in hepatitis-C treatment — was filed by Idenix last March. Today, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in the first phase of its judgment determined that Gilead is the senior party and that Idenix is the junior party. In short, their determination was that Gilead was the first party to file for a patent application for the above nucleoside compounds. The next phase of the trial will determine which party is the first to invent.

Now what: I had always thought Idenix’s patent dispute with Gilead was a bit of a stretch. Now, with the company being named the junior party in the initial phase of its patent trial, there appears a much slimmer hope that it’ll be declared the inventor and patent holder of these nucleoside compounds. Idenix has had a miserable past year with its previous leading compounds placed on clinical hold following the death of a patient in a Bristol-Myers Squibb trial for BMS-096984, which shares some nucleoside similarities to Idenix’s pipeline. To add, Gilead’s Sofosbuvir is cleaned up in all four late-stage trials and looks well on its way to becoming a blockbuster. To conclude, even after today’s tumble, Idenix still has plenty of caution tape draped all over it.

Craving more input? Start by adding Idenix to your free and personalized watchlist so you can keep up on the latest news with the company.

While you can certainly make huge gains in biotechs like Idenix, the best investing approach is to choose great companies and stick with them for the long term. The Motley Fool’s free report “3 Stocks That Will Help You Retire Rich” names stocks that could help you build long-term wealth and retire well, along with some winning wealth-building strategies that every investor should be aware of. Click here now to keep reading.

The article Why Idenix Pharmaceuticals Shares Flopped originally appeared on Fool.com.


Fool contributor Sean Williams has no material interest in any companies mentioned in this article. You can follow him on CAPS under the screen name TMFUltraLong, track every pick he makes under the screen name TrackUltraLong, and check him out on Twitter, where he goes by the handle @TMFUltraLong.

The Motley Fool recommends Gilead Sciences. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Is It Worth Getting a Flu Shot? The Answer May Surprise You…

By Sean Williams, The Motley Fool


Source: Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.

I believe some of this plays into common misconceptions that the flu shot will make you sicker, as well as the fact that researchers are doing nothing more than giving you their best guess as to which strain will be dominant this year. Without certainties, more people than the CDC would like are opting not to get vaccinated.

Conversely, this represents a major growth opportunity for flu vaccine makers. These include:

  • FluMist by AstraZeneca : This is the only nasal spray approved by the FDA, and, according to AstraZeneca, it produced 12 million doses for this year’s flu season. Despite having no needles involved, sales of FluMist haven’t taken off as many analysts had expected.
  • Fluzone by Sanofi : As of January, Sanofi’s Fluzone had sold better than expected, with the company producing 60 million doses and selling out of certain aspects of its immunization therapy. Fluzone comes with a particularly shorter and less intimidating needle, which induces less apprehension over “getting a shot.”
  • Fluvirin by Novartis : Novartis’ Fluvirin shipped roughly 36 million doses through mid-January and works in similar fashion to Fluzone. One of the big difference is its approval, which ranges from age 4 and up, versus Fluzone, which can be used in infants as young as six months.
  • Fluarix, Flulaval, and Relenza by GlaxoSmithKline : Flulaval is a vaccine that Glaxo has been supplying regularly for nearly a decade. Fluarix is an “

Filed under:

Every year, it appears that flu season starts earlier and earlier, and somehow, every year, the virus mutates into its “most virulent form ever.” Sometimes it’s a wonder we even survive with the way that news stations discuss the near-plague that sweeps across the country beginning every fall and extending into winter. Yet, we persevere based on a combination of factors, including good genetics, healthy eating habits, making smart life choices, and, supposedly, in some cases, by getting a flu shot.

Keep that needle away, Doc
The jury has definitely been shown both sides of the coin when it comes to the effectiveness of annual flu vaccines. On one hand, physicians will admit that the flu shot is not a cure-all potion that will prevent the flu. Researchers, each year, must take their best guesses based on the data available on what strains of the flu will be circulating and hope that they’ve given flu vaccine manufacturers the proper guide to protect our growing, and aging, population. These guesses are often fairly accurate, but they don’t produce perfect results.

There’s also quite a bit of skepticism regarding the effectiveness of existing flu medications like Tamiflu, which was developed by Gilead Sciences and licensed to Roche . In November, a researcher linked to the British Medical Journal called for European Union nations to sue Roche for not divulging all of its Tamiflu records in 2009 when requested. Roche countered by noting that it released all pertinent legal information, but refused to release confidential patient-level data to the BMJ researchers. The World Health Organization added Tamiflu to its “essential medicines” list, which resulted in many countries stockpiling the medication. However, the vaccine is simultaneously being investigated by the European Medicines Agency (Europe’s version of the Food and Drug Administration) for not reporting the side effects — including deaths — for 19 separate drugs, including Tamiflu, used on approximately 80,000 people in the U.S. 

The numbers don’t lie
On the other hand, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have made it quite statistically clear that there exists demonstrable evidence that flu shots serve a benefit to the greater population. Whether it be in reducing the severity or longevity of the illness, or building the body’s immune system up to support against the virus, the CDC is clear in recommending that people over the age of six months get vaccinated annually.

The CDC posted its mid-season update for 2012-2013 on this year’s vaccine effectiveness (known as VE) on Feb. 21. To my astonishment, the figures were actually quite encouraging. The CDC‘s VE estimate for protection all age groups was 56%. This year’s vaccine was 47% effective against flu A — the H3N2 virus, which is the most common virus this season – and 67% effective against flu B. These results might underwhelm some of you, but the end result is that patients who developed flu A had their chance of hospitalization …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Gilead Keeps on Building

By David Williamson, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

In the following video, Motley Fool health-care analyst David Williamson discusses a new E.U. approval for Gilead for its quad pill HIV drug cocktail, which has shares up 2% to near all-time highs. David tells investors why this is just one more piece to the puzzle for Gilead, as it continues to build its empire in the treatment of HIV.

While you can certainly make huge gains in biotech and pharmaceuticals, the best investing approach is to choose great companies and stick with them for the long term. The Motley Fool‘s free report, “3 Stocks That Will Help You Retire Rich,” names stocks that could help you build long-term wealth and retire well, along with some winning wealth-building strategies that every investor should be aware of. Click here now to keep reading.

The article Gilead Keeps on Building originally appeared on Fool.com.


David Williamson has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Gilead Sciences and Johnson & Johnson. The Motley Fool owns shares of Johnson & Johnson. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 – 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

(function(c,a){window.mixpanel=a;var b,d,h,e;b=c.createElement(“script”);
b.type=”text/javascript”;b.async=!0;b.src=(“https:”===c.location.protocol?”https:”:”http:”)+
‘//cdn.mxpnl.com/libs/mixpanel-2.2.min.js’;d=c.getElementsByTagName(“script”)[0];
d.parentNode.insertBefore(b,d);a._i=[];a.init=function(b,c,f){function d(a,b){
var c=b.split(“.”);2==c.length&&(a=a[c[0]],b=c[1]);a[b]=function(){a.push([b].concat(
Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments,0)))}}var g=a;”undefined”!==typeof f?g=a[f]=[]:
f=”mixpanel”;g.people=g.people||[];h=[‘disable’,’track’,’track_pageview’,’track_links’,
‘track_forms’,’register’,’register_once’,’unregister’,’identify’,’alias’,’name_tag’,
‘set_config’,’people.set’,’people.increment’];for(e=0;e<h.length;e++)d(g,h[e]);
a._i.push([b,c,f])};a.__SV=1.2;})(document,window.mixpanel||[]);
mixpanel.init("9659875b92ba8fa639ba476aedbb73b9");

function addEvent(obj, evType, fn, useCapture){
if (obj.addEventListener){
obj.addEventListener(evType, fn, useCapture);
return true;
} else if (obj.attachEvent){
var r = obj.attachEvent("on"+evType, fn);
return r;
}
}

addEvent(window, "load", function(){new FoolVisualSciences();})
addEvent(window, "load", function(){new PickAd();})

var themeName = 'dailyfinance.com';
var _gaq = _gaq || [];
_gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-24928199-1']);
_gaq.push(['_trackPageview']);

(function () {

var ga = document.createElement('script');
ga.type = 'text/javascript';
ga.async = true;
ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www') + '.google-analytics.com/ga.js';

var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s);
})();

Read | Permalink | <a target=_blank href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/forward/20515445/" title="Send this entry to a …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Is This the Next Investing Bubble?

By Brian Orelli and Max Macaluso, Ph.D., The Motley Fool

Filed under:

With the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index hitting record highs, Motley Fool health care analyst Max Macaluso and Fool contributor Brian Orelli sat down to chat about whether we’re in a biotech bubble. Their conversation follows:

Max Macaluso: So, Brian, generalist investors love looking at indexes — like the Dow Jones Industrial Average, S&P 500, or Nasdaq Composite — to feel the pulse of the broader market. It’s important to stay in tune with how the overall market is performing, but we both focus on the biotech sector. How can biotech investors get a quick snapshot of how stocks in this industry are performing?

Brian Orelli: There are a couple of biotech indexes: the AMEX Biotech index (^BTK) and the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (^NBI). And then there are some ETFs that track those funds or another basket of companies they’ve created, the SPDR S&P Biotech ETF (XBI), iShares NASDAQ Biotechnology Fund (IBB), and First Trust NYSE Arca Biotechnology Index Fund (FBT) for example.

I think most people follow the NBI or the iShares ETF that tracks it.

Macaluso: The Dow Jones Industrial Average is hovering near an all-time high. Is the NBI also hitting record highs?

Orelli: It just hit a record high, but we have to go further back than 2007 — the last time the Dow was at an all-time high. The NBI was at this level back in 2000. Like the dot-com bubble, the biotech bubble burst, and it’s taken us this long to recover.

Macaluso: You’re drawing an eerie parallel here… do you think we’re in another biotech bubble right now?

Orelli: I don’t think we’re in a bubble. I was still in grad school during the last one, so I wasn’t covering the sector as closely as I do now, but I remember the euphoria for biotech. In contrast, I don’t think valuations are over the top today.

Keep in mind that overall value should go up over time. Companies are pumping billions of dollars into R&D. That should be creating more valuable companies. If it isn’t, we have a problem.

Macaluso: So if valuations across the industry aren’t inflated at the moment, what’s behind the biotech industry’s incredible run lately?

Orelli: The index has run up in large part because of a couple of key components that make up a large portion of the index. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals for instance is over 8% of the index. Its macular degeneration drug, Eylea, has been selling better than investors — and the company for that matter — had expected. Shares are up over 50% over the last year. Gilead Sciences has almost doubled over the last year as investors have high hopes for its hepatitis C franchise.

That’s the thing about indexes. There are 119 companies in the NBI. Euphoria for all the little guys can move the index, but so can monster moves by a few of the big companies. Those might be overvalued now — it depends on whether Regeneron can develop more drugs and, for Gilead, whether …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

European CHMP Adopts Positive Opinion for Stribild®, a Once-Daily, Integrase Inhibitor-Based, Single

By Business Wirevia The Motley Fool

Filed under:

European CHMP Adopts Positive Opinion for Stribild ® , a Once-Daily, Integrase Inhibitor-Based, Single Tablet Regimen for the Treatment of HIV-1 Infection

FOSTER CITY, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Gilead Sciences, Inc. (NAS: GILD) today announced that the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), the scientific committee of the European Medicines Agency (EMA), has adopted a positive opinion on the company’s Marketing Authorisation Application (MAA) for the once-daily, single tablet regimen Stribild® for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adult patients who are antiretroviral-naïve or are infected with HIV-1 without known mutations associated with resistance to any of the three antiretroviral agents in Stribild. Stribild combines elvitegravir, an integrase inhibitor, and cobicistat, a pharmacoenhancing agent, with Truvada® (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil (as fumarate)). The CHMP‘s positive recommendation will be reviewed by the European Commission, which has the authority to approve medicines for use in the 27 countries of the European Union (EU).

“With its potency, tolerability and convenient once-daily dosing, we believe Stribild has the potential to be an important treatment option for patients new to therapy or with no known resistance to any of the three components of the product,” said John C. Martin, PhD, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Gilead Sciences. “We are pleased with today’s positive opinion from the CHMP, and anticipate receiving a final decision from the European Commission on our application for Stribild in the coming months.”

The regulatory filing for Stribild is supported by 48-week data from two Phase 3 double-blind, active-controlled, randomized studies in which Stribild met its primary objective of non-inferiority compared to Atripla® (efavirenz 600 mg/emtricitabine 200 mg/tenofovir disoproxil (as fumarate) 300 mg) (Study 102) and to a regimen containing ritonavir-boosted atazanavir plus Truvada (Study 103). In November 2012, data from Studies 102 and 103 were presented at the 11th International Congress on Drug Therapy in HIV Infection in Glasgow, United Kingdom. These data demonstrated that Stribild maintained high antiviral efficacy through 96 weeks of treatment. In all studies, Stribild was well tolerated and most adverse events were mild to moderate. The most common adverse events observed were nausea, diarrhea, upper respiratory tract infection and headache.

Stribild has received marketing approval in the United States, Canada, South Korea and Australia. To increase access to Stribild in the developing world, Gilead has granted its Indian manufacturing partners and the Medicines Patent Pool the right to develop and distribute generic versions of Stribild in 100 developing countries. These agreements include a complete technology transfer from Gilead of the manufacturing process for the single tablet regimen.

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

3 Ways You Can Be a Successful Biotech Investor

By Sean Williams, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Whether you’ve decided to take notice, the biotechnology sector is rapidly evolving from the roll-of-the-dice gamble that it was in the early 2000s to an investor’s paradise. Better venture capital funding, vast improvements in clinical testing and drug development technologies, faster FDA approvals, and considerable amounts of cross-corporate collaboration have made the biotech sector a stomping ground for investor dollars.

However, take note that I didn’t say “trader’s dollars” — because there are numerous ways you can minimize your risk by investing in the biotech sector without sacrificing long-term gains. Here are three primary ways to reap the rewards of biotech without assuming the all-or-nothing misses often wrongly associated with the sector.

1. Target established biotechnology companies.
This one probably goes without saying, but by purchasing established biotechnology companies with actively growing pipelines, you tend to eliminate a lot of the downside risks associated with one-hit wonders.

Affymax is the perfect example of why biotech investors want to do their homework before investing. Even before its anemia drug Omontys was voluntarily recalled because of a number of deaths and hypersensitivity issues associated with the drug, it should have raised red flags to shareholders. Omontys was Affymax’s only approved drug, and it was being utilized as a combination therapy in its only other two clinical trials. Essentially, it was Omontys or nothing for Affymax — and in turn since the recall, its share price has gone from more than $20 to practically nothing!

Instead, I would encourage prospective long-term investors to turn to biotech companies with plenty of established drugs already on the market that also have numerous blockbusters plainly visible in their pipeline. I believe both Celgene and Gilead Sciences perfectly fit this bill.

Celgene’s superstar has been cancer drug Abraxane — which was first approved to treat metastatic breast cancer in 2005, but has been piling up additional indications and positive test results rapidly as of late. Abraxane added the indication of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treatment in October, and, just a month later, Celgene noted that Abraxane when combined with Eli Lilly‘s Gemzar helped improve survival rates in patients with pancreatic cancer. On top of this, Celgene announced in January the possibility that it could double revenue and triple profits, organically, by 2017! Considering a multitude of possible new indications for Abraxane, the approval of Pomalyst for advanced multiple myeloma, and the potential for Apremilast to be approved for treating psoriasis, Celgene’s future as a long-term investment looks bright.

The same can be said for Gilead Sciences — which has a wide-reaching portfolio of products targeting cardiovascular and liver diseases, but headed most prominently by its established HIV/AIDS drug program. The scary thing is that Gilead’s pipeline could be the most robust of any biotech company. Stribild, the company’s new entirely in-house all-in-one HIV medication, was approved in August and will soon replace Atripla. Also, Sofosbuvir, the company’s experimental oral hepatitis-C …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Did This Wall Street Bank Get It Wrong on Health Care?

By Keith Speights, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Did Morgan Stanley get it wrong on health care? The big investment firm recently published its “20 for 2016” report highlighting stocks that it thinks will perform the best over the next few years. Since health care makes up more than 17% of the gross domestic product of the U.S., you might expect that three or four stocks from the sector would be in this top 20 list. That wasn’t the case. Only one health-care stock made the Morgan Stanley ranking: Gilead Sciences .  

Why weren’t there more health-care companies? The biggest reason is that Morgan Stanley wasn’t trying to balance its stock picks by industry representation. The company stated that its focus was on “sustainability — of competitive advantages, business model, pricing power, cost efficiency, and growth.”

That approach sounds reasonable. And Gilead was a great pick based on those criteria. However, I still suspect that health care was underrepresented. Here are three companies that probably should have made Morgan Stanley‘s list.

If we’re looking for a sustainable business model, pharmacy benefits management, or PBM, stands out as a great one. With the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services projecting that annual prescription drug spending will increase nearly 75% by 2021, the demand for services to help control these costs should grow. As the largest PBM in the country, Express Scripts sits in the catbird seat for this flourishing industry.

Express Scripts‘ size gives it several competitive advantages. The company can use its heavy purchasing volume to negotiate better deals with pharmaceutical companies than smaller rivals can. Express Scripts‘ economies of scale allow it to drive down costs, particularly in process-intensive areas such as mail-order drug delivery. The company also benefits significantly from its accumulation of data garnered by processing 29% of retail pharmacy prescriptions. This data allows it to develop more effective programs to control drug costs for its customers.

What about growth? Express Scripts‘ revenue more than doubled over the past year and increased by nearly 50% over the last three years. Granted, much of that growth stemmed from the company’s 2012 acquisition of Medco. However, Express Scripts also grew its bottom line by 4% and 5% over the past year and last three years, respectively, even with the big costs of the Medco deal. Those numbers are better than several of the companies included on Morgan Stanley‘s top 20 list.

Morgan Stanley picked a great biotech with Gilead. However, they omitted another impressive player in the industry — Celgene. When it comes to growth, Celgene actually looks better in several metrics. The company’s revenue jumped nearly 28% over the last three years compared to Gilead’s 11% growth. Celgene’s earnings per share likewise soared by 28% during this period, while Gilead increased earnings per share by 5%.

Celgene’s primary drug, Revlimid, targets multiple myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes, or MDS, both of which are bone marrow diseases. Revlimid is the top-selling drug for those indications and continues to experience solid …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Should Incyte Investors Be Panicked?

By David Williamson, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Shares of biotech Incyte came down hard today, after news that the company’s drug Jakafi may have weakened the immune system of one patient in the U.K. enough to allow a rare type of viral brain disease to take hold, which proved fatal. Will this be fatal for the stock as well? In this video, Motley Fool health-care analyst David Williamson gives investors some advice that may temper their panic a bit.

While you can certainly make huge gains in biotech and pharmaceuticals, the best investing approach is to choose great companies and stick with them for the long term. The Motley Fool‘s free report “
3 Stocks That Will Help You Retire Rich
” names stocks that could help you build long-term wealth and retire well, along with some winning wealth-building strategies that every investor should be aware of. 
Click here now
 to keep reading.

The article Should Incyte Investors Be Panicked? originally appeared on Fool.com.


David Williamson has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Gilead Sciences and Quest Diagnostics. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools don’t all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 – 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

(function(c,a){window.mixpanel=a;var b,d,h,e;b=c.createElement(“script”);
b.type=”text/javascript”;b.async=!0;b.src=(“https:”===c.location.protocol?”https:”:”http:”)+
‘//cdn.mxpnl.com/libs/mixpanel-2.2.min.js’;d=c.getElementsByTagName(“script”)[0];
d.parentNode.insertBefore(b,d);a._i=[];a.init=function(b,c,f){function d(a,b){
var c=b.split(“.”);2==c.length&&(a=a[c[0]],b=c[1]);a[b]=function(){a.push([b].concat(
Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments,0)))}}var g=a;”undefined”!==typeof f?g=a[f]=[]:
f=”mixpanel”;g.people=g.people||[];h=[‘disable’,’track’,’track_pageview’,’track_links’,
‘track_forms’,’register’,’register_once’,’unregister’,’identify’,’alias’,’name_tag’,
‘set_config’,’people.set’,’people.increment’];for(e=0;e<h.length;e++)d(g,h[e]);
a._i.push([b,c,f])};a.__SV=1.2;})(document,window.mixpanel||[]);
mixpanel.init("9659875b92ba8fa639ba476aedbb73b9");

function addEvent(obj, evType, fn, useCapture){
if (obj.addEventListener){
obj.addEventListener(evType, fn, useCapture);
return true;
} else if (obj.attachEvent){
var r = obj.attachEvent("on"+evType, fn);
return r;
}
}

addEvent(window, "load", function(){new FoolVisualSciences();})
addEvent(window, "load", function(){new PickAd();})

var themeName = 'dailyfinance.com';
var _gaq = _gaq || [];
_gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-24928199-1']);
_gaq.push(['_trackPageview']);

(function () {

var ga = document.createElement('script');
ga.type = 'text/javascript';
ga.async = true;
ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Is Bristol-Myers Squibb One of the Best Companies in America?

By Brian Orelli, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Missed it by this much. That’s how it goes some times.

The Motley Fool recently published its list of The 25 Best Companies in America and while Bristol-Myers Squibb  made the initial cut down from 1,700 public companies to about 40, it failed to make the final cut.

For having such a long name and a history that dates back to 1858, Bristol-Myers Squibb is surprisingly smaller than most of its pharmaceutical peers. Quite a few younger big biotechs — Celgene, Gilead Sciences, and Amgen — have market caps larger than Bristol-Myers.

While bigger is often better because it helps with profit margins, I like the smaller, more-focused Bristol-Myers.

A few years ago, Bristol-Myers decided to slim down and focus exclusively on drug development. The company spun off its baby formula business, Mead Johnson Nutrition , and sold off quite a few other auxiliary businesses while expanding its drug development through acquisitions to fill its pipeline.

That forward-thinking attitude has earned it a nomination for the Fool’s top 25 best-run companies.

The case for Bristol-Myers Squibb
Drug development is risky business, but Bristol-Myers has protected investors by sharing that risk with other drugmakers. Its mega blockbuster Plavix was developed with Sanofi . Bristol-Myers’ next potential blockbuster, Eliquis, was developed with Pfizer . The company has also established a diabetes partnership with AstraZeneca , which led to the companies jointly purchasing Amylin Pharmaceuticals.

Developing drugs with a partner cuts into the potential profits, but it also shields the company from major hits if the drug fails. When Bristol-Myers has gone it alone, it hasn’t been pretty. The company purchased Inhibitex for $2.5 billion only to see the lead hepatitis C drug it got in the deal fail in the clinic.

Beyond shareholders, Bristol-Meyers treats the rest of the stakeholders with equal respect.

Like most drugmakers, Bristol-Myers has a patient assistance program to help patients pay for their medication. In 2011, the company provided 250,000 patients with free medications valued at more than $450 million.

More generally, Bristol-Myers takes its corporate responsibility seriously. In 2010, it set a series of goals to be completed by 2015, including reducing total energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by 15% and to reduce water use by 10%.

According to reviews on Glassdoor, only 68% of employees would recommend working at Bristol-Myers to a friend, although interestingly 91% approve of CEO Lamberto Andreotti. Many of the reviews complain that it’s difficult to advance in the company. Apparently everyone wants to eventually have Andreotti’s job, but doesn’t feel like that’s possible. Something for the company to work on, for sure.

The case against 
The marketing of drugs is supposed to be straightforward. The Food and Drug Administration approves a drug for a specific indication. While doctors are allowed to prescribe drugs off label, drugmakers are expected to limit their promotion to just the FDA-approved use.

In the past, Bristol-Myers seems to have blurred that line. In 2007, Bristol-Myers agreed to pay more than $515 million to resolve …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

How Sequestration Will Affect the Health-Care Sector and Your Pocketbook

By Sean Williams, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Stop me if you’ve heard this joke before: “Two political parties walk into a bar; both point the finger at each other for the country’s fiscal mess, yet neither is willing to budge an inch from their underlying views…” My guess is you’ve heard this one all too often and it’s not even funny anymore… because the truth rarely is.

The highly anticipated sequestration, aimed at removing $1.1 trillion out of the federal budget over the next decade, kicked into effect on March 1, and is set to gradually, but decisively, remove $85 billion from the federal budget. These cuts are going to come from all walks of government – from USDA inspectors, to military spending, and even entitlement programs like Medicare, which is expected to see approximately a 2% reduction in reimbursements.  

Today, I want to take a closer look at how sequestration could impact the health care sector.

As you might imagine, many of the effects of removing government funding tend to be negative — but it’s not as cut-and-dried as it might appear on the surface.

How it’ll affect safety
The most immediate impact of sequestration appears to be whether patient and consumer safety will be affected negatively. On the surface I’d say this is a distinct possibility with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention seeing nearly a $450 million cut in its budget and the FDA, whose expenses are predominantly tied to its personnel costs, alluding that a $318 million reduction in funds will result in layoffs or furloughs totaling 2,100 USDA food inspectors.

Food safety looks like a clear loser with Tyson Foods and Smithfield Foods projected to suffer from USDA furloughs. By law, processed meat cannot be sold in stores without having been inspected, leaving Tyson and Smithfield in a big bind come the summer time when these furloughs are expected to hit the hardest. The end result may be less meat on supermarket shelves and higher prices because of it.

The bigger concern here actually stems from the CDC‘s reduced budget. As GlobalData analysts noted this past week, one of the CDC‘s primary functions is to provide educational and preventative materials and products to curb the spread of infectious diseases such as hepatitis and HIV. A lack of funding here could result in higher occurrences of these infectious diseases. However, I disagree with their analysis that this negative occurrence could have the hidden benefit of driving down costs as providers opt for cheaper drugs in the HIV space, hurting the launch of expensive new offerings like . Gilead Sciences‘   four-in-one HIV medication, Stribild. Made with all in-house compounds, if Stribild supplants Gilead’s current best-selling HIV treatment, Atripla, it will result in higher margins for the company. Keeping things in perspective, I wouldn’t expect a huge spike in HIV occurrences, but I wouldn’t be surprised if documented cases rose year-over-year.

How it’ll affect research and development
Research …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

The Perfect Cure for Hepatitis C?

By Brian Orelli, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Gilead Sciences‘ sofosbuvir with Johnson & Johnson and Medivir‘s simeprevir are a match made in heaven. So far, the combination has cleared hepatitis C virus from patients no matter how it’s administered.

Interim data from a phase 2a showed 100% of patients were free from virus 12 weeks after treatment. The trial was divided into four treatment groups: Patients were treated for either 12 or 24 weeks with either the just the two experimental drugs or adding an approved generic called ribavirin to the mix.

The results are especially impressive because these patients had already failed to respond to treatment with a pegylated interferon — Roche‘s Pegasys or Merck‘s Pegintron — and ribavirin. Retreatment with those drugs and adding Vertex Pharmaceuticals‘ new drug Incivek only results in cures about 32% of the time for patients that failed a first treatment. More importantly, unlike Incivek, the sofosbuvir-simeprevir combination doesn’t require pegylated interferons that produce nasty side effects.

We have to be careful drawing too much from the data. The trial is scheduled to enroll 80 patients, but only 10 have reached 12 weeks post treatment. Nineteen patients have been treated completely, and all of them were free of virus at the end of treatment. But the virus can be knocked below the limits of detection for hepatitis C tests but not eradicated by drugs, and then relapse and build back up after the treatment ends. Being free from virus 12 weeks after treatment is essentially a cure.

Despite the awesome data, this combo therapy isn’t likely to ever see the pharmacy, at least not in a single pill. The deal to run a clinical trial testing the two drugs was established between Johnson & Johnson and Pharmasset, before Gilead bought the biotech.

Gilead has made it abundantly clear that it’s planning on pushing on with a combination of sofosbuvir and drugs it has developed in-house. It shunned Bristol-Myers Squibb , which also has a hepatitis C drug that produced solid data with sofosbuvir. I doubt Gilead will be interested in teaming up further on a sofosbuvir-simeprevir combination.

Fortunately for Johnson & Johnson and Medivir, simeprevir is being tested with additional hepatitis-C drugs, including Vertex’s VX-135, Idenix Pharmaceuticals‘ IDX719 and Bristol-Myers’ daclatasvir. If any of those combinations can hit 100% efficacy and the partners can agree to produce a convenient combination pill, they should have a shot at taking on Gilead.

Is bigger really better?
Involved in everything from hepatitis C drugs to baby powder, Johnson & Johnson’s critics are convinced that the company is spread way too thin. If you want to know if J&J is nothing but a bloated corporate whale — or a well-diversified giant that’s perfect for your portfolio — check out The Fool’s new premium report outlining the Johnson & Johnson story in terms that any investor can understand. Claim your copy, and a year of free analyst updates, by clicking …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

This Biotech's Run Is Far From Done

By David Williamson, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

In the following video, Motley Fool health-care analyst David Williamson looks at two major pieces of news surrounding biotech company Gilead that show that the company has a bright future ahead. He discusses another 100% cure rate for the company in the hepatitis-C space, and a new once-daily HIV drug for the company, with a better safety profile than the competition.

While you can certainly make huge gains in biotech and pharmaceuticals, the best investing approach is to choose great companies and stick with them for the long term. The Motley Fool‘s free report “
3 Stocks That Will Help You Retire Rich
” names stocks that could help you build long-term wealth and retire well, along with some winning wealth-building strategies that every investor should be aware of. 
Click here now
 to keep reading.

The article This Biotech’s Run Is Far From Done originally appeared on Fool.com.


David Williamson has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Gilead Sciences and Johnson & Johnson and owns shares of Johnson & Johnson. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools don’t all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 – 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

(function(c,a){window.mixpanel=a;var b,d,h,e;b=c.createElement(“script”);
b.type=”text/javascript”;b.async=!0;b.src=(“https:”===c.location.protocol?”https:”:”http:”)+
‘//cdn.mxpnl.com/libs/mixpanel-2.2.min.js’;d=c.getElementsByTagName(“script”)[0];
d.parentNode.insertBefore(b,d);a._i=[];a.init=function(b,c,f){function d(a,b){
var c=b.split(“.”);2==c.length&&(a=a[c[0]],b=c[1]);a[b]=function(){a.push([b].concat(
Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments,0)))}}var g=a;”undefined”!==typeof f?g=a[f]=[]:
f=”mixpanel”;g.people=g.people||[];h=[‘disable’,’track’,’track_pageview’,’track_links’,
‘track_forms’,’register’,’register_once’,’unregister’,’identify’,’alias’,’name_tag’,
‘set_config’,’people.set’,’people.increment’];for(e=0;e<h.length;e++)d(g,h[e]);
a._i.push([b,c,f])};a.__SV=1.2;})(document,window.mixpanel||[]);
mixpanel.init("9659875b92ba8fa639ba476aedbb73b9");

function addEvent(obj, evType, fn, useCapture){
if (obj.addEventListener){
obj.addEventListener(evType, fn, useCapture);
return true;
} else if (obj.attachEvent){
var r = obj.attachEvent("on"+evType, fn);
return r;
}
}

addEvent(window, "load", function(){new FoolVisualSciences();})
addEvent(window, "load", function(){new PickAd();})

var themeName = 'dailyfinance.com';
var _gaq = _gaq || [];
_gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-24928199-1']);
_gaq.push(['_trackPageview']);

(function () {

var ga = document.createElement('script');
ga.type = 'text/javascript';
ga.async = true;
ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

iShares S&amp;P 500 Growth Index Fund Experiences Big Outflow

By ETFChannel.com

Looking today at week-over-week shares outstanding changes among the universe of ETFs covered at ETF Channel, one standout is the iShares S&P 500 Growth Index Fund (AMEX: IVW) where we have detected an approximate $80.0 million dollar outflow — that’s a 1.2% decrease week over week (from 85,800,000 to 84,800,000). Among the largest underlying components of IVW, in trading today Visa Inc (NYSE: V) is trading flat, Gilead Sciences, Inc. (NASD: GILD) is up about 0.3%, and Verizon Communications Inc (NYSE: VZ) is higher by about 0.3%. For a complete list of holdings, visit the IVW Holdings page » …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Forbes Markets