StemCell Therapy

Many intriguing articles have been written about investing in biotechnology. Biotechnology investment has been referenced by many knowledgeable and respectable authors as controversial, out of favor, and even sexy (this article by Stephen Simpson, CFA, is must read). Surviving current trends in biotechnology stock price manipulation can be both stressful and disappointing. This leaves us all to wonder is it even worth it to try speculative biotechnology as an investment option?

StrongBio believes it is worth it, even if it results in losses that are hard to endure. In the end, contributions to healthcare from growing sources of capital are extremely important for improved patient care (termed supply-side capital). As these contributions have grown, however, so too has waste. With proper selection, timing, and diversification (three pillars of biotechnology investment), the common retail investor can eventually be financially rewarded as philanthropic goals of the population are met.

Simply put, biotechnology companies focus on drug development aiming to treat an unmet or under-met disease or medical condition. Companies that have succeeded have net sales in the tens of billions and total market values in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Speculative biotechnology companies, in contrast, differ from proven top biotechnology companies in that they often have no approved products or revenues.

Gary Pisano of Harvard Business School has done extensive modeling of biotechnology (and other technology) returns. Reports between 2006 and 2012 indicate that average biotechnology returns have been historically unimpressive; with 25-year returns of "market baskets" of biotech stocks yielding only about 10% per year. This means that much of the legendary "opportunity" in biotechnology stocks revolves around successful portfolio management of technological trend shifts and timing positions accordingly.

Much of the challenges lie in the fact that science experts tend to focus into niches instead of pursue interdisciplinary science. Scientists tend to lack fundamental economics or business expertise and vice-versa, with business leaders lacking science background.

So what if a speculative biotechnology company has shown positive data in a curative treatment for cancer? Many things can still go wrong for an investor. One should always have a plan for setbacks and delays. Sometimes clinical setbacks can occur requiring a company to delay a trial until regulatory requirements are met. Other delays are more business-oriented, with slated clinical trials held up due to lack of funding such as in poor economic times.

Even legal setbacks occur and can cost both time and money. And then we have the gatekeeper: FDA, and regulatory setbacks that can occur. The fact is most biotechnology projects fail. According to Pisano, the average biotechnology company is likely to fail 90% of the time, with companies that make it all the way to Phase 3 experiencing approximately 50% chance of success.

Multidisciplinary investment management increases the likelihood of a success, meaning, that many common retail investors are going to have to try to wear multiple hats when performing qualitative analyses. That's what StrongBio calls work. It's a lot of work. But knowing what to look for in each discipline can be of great service to the retail investor.

And if all of those pitfalls are not enough, going back to our legitimate cancer data success scenario, market manipulation and fake news from negative press can still make investors feel like their winners are losing investments for quite some time. Take for instance the 2016 situation with Celator Pharmaceuticals, which was driven down to $0.79 cents per share and rose 1600% when whatever market forces that were holding it down, along with negative press, finally gave up the fight to an obvious winner (having been bought out by Jazz Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ:JAZZ).

The oppressive forces on the stock persisted right up until FDA review. Other company shareholders, like those of Northwest Biotherapeutics (NASDAQ:NWBO), allege that negative press and stock manipulation are linked. Immunomedics's (NASDAQ:IMMU) stock see-sawed back and forth several times between $2 and $5 (and even drew a halt from the SEC), market cap between 180 million and 500 million respectfully, in 2016 with alternating negative legal press by no less than 20 law firms and positive research press and stock price volatility. Extreme patience is required while waiting for "fair value."

The University of Chicago oncologist Mark Ratain postulated that a company with a market cap of less than $300 million is unlikely to succeed. Commonly known in biotechnology investment circles, the Feuerstein-Ratain rule, was a solid predictor in the past. This year companies are defying the 300 million rule. StrongBio believes the rule used to hold water because there was a predictable method to the involvement of big pharma in purchasing speculative biotechnology cancer stocks.

So either big pharma is no longer able to identify useful technologies and many are slipping through the cracks, which is unlikely, or something in the markets is changing. It is also possible that it was getting predictable to pick biotechnology successes based upon the highly successful metric by the well-respected Feuerstein and Ratain, so market makers have changed it up a little. Past open market buyout periods of obtaining shares of speculative stocks drove prices up as a whole (or held them flat for long periods of time) to approximately 300 million market caps. Accumulation such as this no longer seems to be in effect.

Whatever the mechanism of value assignment by the market, it is clear there is a new market pattern emerging in biotechnology, with lower than normal market caps. StrongBio believes there may be several contributing reasons for this. One, investment levels are predicted to be the lowest that they have been since 1947. This is also true in the investment banking sector, a big source of biotechnology funding.

Simply put we have not had a great investment economy, and risky biotechnology may be regarded as an irresponsible investment during tough financial times. Because new patterns on speculative biotechnology company stocks show suppression over periods of months and years, it is possible there just is not as much retail and/or institutional support as in years past.

Two, is the SEC unconscious at the wheel or did someone outsource that job to Asia? This query addresses concern over foreign-based or hostile entities' ability to starve funding for cash hungry technology companies when they need to sell stock. In recent years, an increase in foreign companies cheaply acquiring U.S. biotechnologies developed at tax-payer-supported universities and other technologies funded by state and local governments has plagued markets.

New stock exchanges like IEX have even been set up in an attempt to thwart different kinds of financial manipulation utilizing delays in trade execution (read this book or a synopsis about it in Flash Boys; it's fascinating). However, the market is currently responding to new executive political leadership in a corrective way. One can always hope that a nation of laws will have proper enforcement.

Three, short sellers have influenced stock prices (being respectful of regulations) for a long time, but not to the extent that manipulation is occurring now. Foreign countries like those in Western Europe, Australia and Canada have entirely outlawed the practice of shorting on their own stock exchanges. This indicates these countries have identified that stocks were oversold and manipulated and regulations and laws limiting short sales were not able to control it.

It would appear pretty obvious to those following speculative biotechnology that the same is occurring in the U.S. For instance, one exploring and mining company presented evidence to the SEC of a naked short position in the hundreds of billions of shares. Regardless of mechanism there may be a way to estimate increases in short-selling using well established metrics in biotechnology.

StrongBio cites the 2016 failures (and likely more in 2017) of the long-established Feuerstein-Ratain rule as evidence NOT that the metric is somehow flawed, but rather that market conditions have changed. The 300 million "rule" is now as dated as 4-inch tile countertops for kitchens and bathrooms, and has likely been rendered obsolete by rampant stock price manipulation. But that does not mean that one should abandon biotechnology investments.

Eventually, a fair value is decided between a suitor and company management if something in the pipeline passes FDA and can be sold. Since Celator (NASDAQ:CPXX) rendered the Feuerstein-Ratain rule obsolete at a market cap of less than $100 million, and Immunomedics obtained FDA breakthrough therapy status in triple negative breast cancer at about $160 million, we know the static threshold value of 300 million is no longer even close to critical mass for the metric.

Out of fairness, the metric can be influenced by other factors such as a changing FDA landscape as well, but that wouldn't explain the difference in market cap as the FDA does not participate in stock pricing or market making per se. It follows that if market regulation returns to prior levels, the metric threshold would increase back to 300 million.

How much lower can the Feuerstein-Ratain critical threshold go? That may depend in part how many shares can be shorted in a given company. StrongBio cites here mention of a gnarly cancer drug company from a recent article by an author of the metric that has approvable Phase 3 data. According to a report by H.C. Wainright, this 40 million market cap company, CytRx (NASDAQ:CYTR), is likely to get some kind of approval pathway for aldoxorubicin on its statistically significant Phase 3 sarcoma data, where it outperformed all 5 other drugs in the study.

One might approximate that if short selling is the cause for lower market cap FDA approvals in cancer, estimates based upon how much additional share supply exists now versus when the rule was working can be made. 300 million, the past metric threshold, divided by 40 million, the current potential low, gives a WHOPPING 7.5-fold more potential share supply (provided to the market by short selling). This assumes that the relationship between stock price and shorting of shares has some kind of linear and direct relationship, such as common economic supply and demand curves.

This implies the Feuerstein-Ratain metric tool is a dynamic sliding-threshold subject to changing market factors. One might argue that a linear relationship would be less representative for a "real world" sigmoidal supply and demand model, such as that proposed by Alfred Marshall. These curves break from a linear path to form a smooth parabolic curve with sigmoid limits because of factors such as wear and tear of production equipment, transportation limits, and other practical factors in supply-side analysis. In an electronic market system of a thinly traded biotechnology stock, it is unlikely these factors are relevant.

This emerging scenario creates an even greater margin for profit if one can properly select stocks that are at a record low market cap threshold for FDA approval in cancer, sometimes called short squeeze. At some point, speculative biotechnology companies get a fair value assigned if management is honest enough to serve their fiduciary duty to shareholders. It is at the point of buyout that fair value was reached for CPXX. Fair value soon will be reached for IMMU based upon significant partnership (Seattle Genetics, SGEN) and possibly even CYTR.

StrongBio cautions the reader that CytRx has been accused of hiring stock promotion media in the past, and its pillar of honor might have been "pierced." Nonetheless it appears that after a substantial period of risk everything that was promoted is likely to be true. In addition, remember that biotechnology investment in a "market basket" of companies typically returns about 10%. StrongBio does not recommend deviating from this basket approach, but rather by changing weighting late into development and after dilutions, obtain higher than 10% returns when possible.

The primary pillar of biotechnology stock investing, selection, is obviously a critical factor, standing tall in front of the pillar of timing. How can we avoid picking a loser? The second pillar of timing comes down to choosing a company with favorable Phase 3 data as they meet with FDA in a type B meeting (where FDA reviews the data outcomes of a clinical study) and an abnormally low stock price compared to the annual market its product will serve.

These two pillars stand in synergism, as one doesn't have a favorable investment with only one solid pillar supporting a portfolio candidate under current market conditions. It is important to invest lightly at first so that lower prices do not cause harm to a portfolio. If the stock runs up just be happy you had a little.

The pitfall of regulatory hurdles is always a major concern, but there is circumstantial evidence that the FDA will be easing some burdens. Cancer drug shortages (such as existed for doxorubicin in December 2016) can be thwarted by increasing the number of suppliers and approving safer more effective derivatives. The FDA may favor competition to lower prices of potentially egregious monopolies. Cancer treatment in the hospital environment is currently trending towards increasing physician options and information as well as for patient-physician interaction as well.

For instance, some drugs may be hard on the liver and not be good for alcoholics, whereas other drugs may be rough on the heart, and be contra-indicated for heart attack sufferers. So demonstration of comparable efficacy may be acceptable if safety is improved for subsets of patients. Whether the desire for increased options will spread from cancer to other indications remains to be seen.

However it is no secret that Trump intends to "slash restraints" artificially put on drug makers by the FDA. If these trends come to fruition, StrongBio expects the chance of success of biotechnology companies to increase, but the markets for some drugs may sink into smaller niches of sales with greater total options available.

So there are certainly the same past investment risks that the FDA will not view data as favorable or that companies will have a hard time proving they can meet production standards for NDA approval, including lot to lot consistency. Oftentimes a speculative biotechnology company can partner this production with a number of firms.

But the reward to risk ratio can at least be dynamically tuned for investment success. With proper selection, timing, and diversification, StrongBio estimates that new regulatory policies and market conditions will make biotechnology investment potentially more common and successful as the outdated thresholds of the past are readjusted to guide investors.

Disclosure: I am/we are long IMMU CYTR.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Editor's Note: This article covers one or more stocks trading at less than $1 per share and/or with less than a $100 million market cap. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.

Read more:
Why Should Investors Consider An Allocation In Speculative Biotechnology: A Sector Analysis - Seeking Alpha

On March 9, 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (National Academies) published a report entitled Preparing for Future Products of Biotechnology, prepared by the Committee on Future Biotechnology Products and Opportunities to Enhance Capabilities of the Biotechnology Regulatory System (Committee). The Committee was asked to describe the possible future products of biotechnology that will arise over the next five to ten years, as well as provide some insights that can help shape the capabilities within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) as they move forward. According to the Committee, agencies may be overwhelmed by the number and diversity of new biotechnology products. The Committee states that the agencies should increase their scientific capabilities, tools, and expertise in key areas of expected growth. The report reflects the Committees deliberations regarding the future products of biotechnology that are likely to appear on the horizon, the challenges that the regulatory agencies might face, and the opportunities for enhancing the regulatory system to prepare for what might be coming. The Committee reached consensus on conclusions and recommendations that are based on extensive information gathering, Committee discussions, and input from a wide variety of communities interested in biotechnology. A copy of the slides used during a National Academies webinar on the report can be found on the National Academies website.

On July 2, 2015, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Office of Management and Budget, the U.S. Trade Representative, and the Council on Environmental Quality issued a memorandum, Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products, directing EPA, FDA, and USDA to update the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology (Coordinated Framework). The Obama Administration asked the agencies to accomplish three tasks:

Clarify the current roles and responsibilities of the EPA, FDA, and USDA in the regulatory process;

Develop a long-term strategy to ensure that the federal regulatory system is equipped to assess efficiently the risks, if any, of the future products of biotechnology; and

Commission an expert analysis of the future landscape of biotechnology products.

As reported previously, on January 4, 2017, the White House announced the release of the 2017 Update to the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology. The 2017 Update provides a comprehensive summary of the roles and responsibilities of EPA, FDA, and USDA with respect to regulating biotechnology products. Together with the National Strategy for Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products, published in September 2016, the 2017 Update offers a complete picture of a robust and flexible regulatory structure that provides appropriate oversight for all products of modern biotechnology. Within that regulatory structure, the federal agencies maintain high standards that, based on the best available science, protect health and the environment, while also establishing transparent, coordinated, predictable and efficient regulatory practices. More information is available in the White House blog item, Increasing the Transparency, Coordination, and Predictability of the Biotechnology Regulatory System.

The July 2, 2015, memorandum called for the commission of an external, independent analysis of the future landscape of biotechnology products. EPA, FDA, and USDA commissioned the National Academies to prepare an analysis to identify potential new risks and frameworks for risk assessment and areas in which the risks or lack of risks relating to the products of biotechnology are well understood. This analysis is presented in the report prepared by the Committee that was released on March 9, 2017.

The Committee was tasked to:

Describe the major advances and the potential new types of biotechnology products likely to emerge over the next five to ten years;

Describe the existing risk-analysis system for biotechnology products including, but perhaps not limited to, risk analyses developed and used by EPA, USDA, and FDA, and describe each agencys authorities as they pertain to the products of biotechnology;

Determine whether potential future products could pose different types of risks relative to existing products and organisms. Where appropriate, identify areas in which the risks or lack of risks relating to the products of biotechnology are well understood; and

Indicate what scientific capabilities, tools, and expertise may be useful to the regulatory agencies to support oversight of potential future products of biotechnology.

Human drugs and medical devices were not included in the purview of the study.

To address its statement of task, the Committee gathered information from a number of sources, and heard from over 70 speakers over the course of three in-person meetings and eight webinars. The Committee received responses to a request for information from a dozen federal agencies, and solicited statements and written comments from members for the public. According to the report, the Committee defined biotechnology products as products developed through genetic engineering or genome engineering (including products where the engineered DNA molecule is itself the product, as in an engineered molecule used as a DNA information-storage medium) or the targeted or in vitro manipulation of genetic information of organisms, including plants, animals, and microbes. The term also covers some products produced by such plants, animals, microbes, and cell-free systems or products derived from all of the above.

The Committee grouped future products into three major classes:

Open-release products: The open-release products that the Committee saw on the horizon include plants, animals, microbes, and synthetic organisms that have been engineered for deliberate release in an open environment. According to the report, the ability to sustain existence in the environment with little or no human intervention is a key change between existing products of biotechnology and some of the future ones anticipated in this class. The report states that the Committee thought that future open-release products would be developed for familiar uses, such as agricultural crops, but would also likely be developed for uses such as cleaning up contaminated sites with engineered microbes, replacing animal-derived meat with meat cultured from animal cells, and controlling invasive species through gene drives;

Contained products: The Committee concluded that future biotechnology products that are produced in contained environments are more likely to be microbial based or synthetically based rather than based on an animal or plant host. According to the report, organisms of many genera are used in fermenters to produce commodity chemicals, fuels, specialty chemicals or intermediates, enzymes, polymers, food additives, and flavors. When considering the laboratory as a contained environment, the report states that many examples of transgenic animals from vendors are widely used today for research and development. Because performing biotechnology in contained environments allows higher control over the choice of host organism, systems with advanced molecular toolboxes are already in high use; and

Platforms: Biotechnology platforms are tools that are used in the creation of other biotechnology products, according to the report, including products that are traditionally characterized as wet lab, such as DNA/RNA, enzymes, vectors, cloning kits, cells, library prep kits, and sequencing prep kits, and products that are dry lab, such as vector drawing software, computer-aided design software, primer calculation software, and informatics tools. The report states that these two categories continue to meld as newer approaches are published or commercialized.

The report notes that there are a variety of technical, economic, and social trends that drive and will continue to drive the types of biotechnology products developed in the next decade. Technical and economic trends in the biological sciences and biological engineering are accelerating the rate at which new product ideas are formulated and the number of actors who are involved in product development. The report states that with regard to social trends, it was evident to the Committee that there are many competing interests, risks, and benefits regarding future biotechnology products. According to the report, it was clear that the U.S. and international regulatory systems will need to achieve a balance among these competing aspects when considering how to manage the development and use of new biotechnology products.

The Committee found that the Coordinated Framework appears to have considerable flexibility in statutory authority to cover a wide range of biotechnology products. The jurisdictions of EPA, FDA, and USDA are defined in ways that may leave gaps or redundancies in regulatory oversight, however. According to the report, even when jurisdiction exists, the available legal authorities may not be ideally tailored to new and emerging biotechnology products. Other agencies will likely have responsibilities to regulate some future biotechnology products, and their roles are not well specified in the Coordinated Framework.

The report states that the Committee found that the complexity of the existing biotechnology regulatory system, which could appear fragmented, results in a system that is difficult for product developers -- including individuals, nontraditional organizations, and small enterprises, as well as consumers, product users, and interested members of the public to navigate. The complexity can cause uncertainty and a lack of predictability for developers of future biotechnology products and creates the potential for loss of public confidence in oversight of future biotechnology products.

According to the report, the increased rate of new product ideas means that the types and number of biotechnology products in the next five to ten years may be significantly larger than the current rate of product introduction. The report cautions EPA, FDA, USDA, and other relevant agencies to prepare for this potential increase, including finding effective means of evaluation that maintains public safety, protects the environment, and satisfies the statutory requirements appropriate for each agency. The increased number of actors involved in product development means that the regulatory agencies will need to be prepared to provide information regarding the regulatory process to groups that may have little familiarity with the Coordinated Framework.

According to the report, advances in biotechnology are leading to products that involve the transformation of less familiar host organisms, have multiple engineered pathways, are comprised of DNA from multiple organisms, or are made from entirely synthetic DNA. Such products may have few or no comparators to existing nonbiotechnology products, which function as the baseline of comparison in current regulatory risk assessments of biotechnology products.

For future biotechnology products in all degrees of complexity and novelty, the Committee considered the risk assessment endpoints related to human health or environmental outcomes, such as illness, injury, death, or loss of ecosystems function. The Committee concluded that these endpoints are not new, but the intermediate steps along the path to those endpoints may be more complex, more ambiguous, and less well characterized than those for existing biotechnology products. According to the report, the scope, scale, complexity, and tempo of biotechnology products likely to enter the regulatory system in the next five to ten years have the potential to critically stress EPA, FDA, and USDA, both in terms of capacity and expertise.

At a high level, the Committee found that there are existing frameworks, tools, and processes for risk analyses and public engagement that can be used to address the issues likely to arise in future biotechnology products in a way that balances competing issues and concerns. Given the profusion of biotechnology products that are on the horizon, however, there is a risk that the capacity of the regulatory agencies may not be able to provide efficiently the quantity and quality of risk assessments that will be needed. The report states that an important approach for dealing with the increase in the products will be the increased use of stratified approaches to regulation, where new and potentially more complex risk analysis methods will need to be developed for some products, while established risk analysis methods can be applied or modified to address products that are familiar or that require less complex risk analysis. To help articulate what capabilities, tools, and expertise might be useful to meet these objectives, the Committee created a conceptual map for decision-making aimed to assess and manage product risk, streamline regulation requirements, and increase transparency.

The Committee identified the following broad themes regarding future opportunities for enhancement of the U.S. biotechnology regulatory system:

The bioeconomy is growing rapidly and the U.S. regulatory system needs to provide a balanced approach for consideration of the many competing interests in the face of this expansion;

The profusion of biotechnology products over the next five to ten years has the potential to overwhelm the U.S. regulatory system, which may be exacerbated by a disconnect between research in regulatory science and expected uses of future biotechnology products;

Regulators will face difficult challenges as they grapple with a broad array of new types of biotechnology products -- for example, cosmetics, toys, pets, and office supplies -- that go beyond contained industrial uses and traditional environmental release (for example, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) or herbicide-resistant crops);

The safe use of new biotechnology products requires rigorous, predictable, and transparent risk-analysis processes whose comprehensiveness, depth, and throughput mirror the scope, scale, complexity, and tempo of future biotechnology applications; and

In addition to the conclusions and recommendations from this report, EPA, FDA, USDA, and other agencies involved in regulation of future biotechnology products would benefit from adopting recommendations made by previous National Academies committees related to future products of biotechnology that are consistent with the findings and recommendations in this report.

On the basis of its conclusions, the Committee developed a number of detailed recommendations regarding actions that can be taken to enhance the capabilities of the biotechnology regulatory system to be prepared for anticipated future products of biotechnology.

EPA, FDA, USDA, and other agencies involved in regulation of future biotechnology products should increase scientific capabilities, tools, expertise, and horizon scanning in key areas of expected growth of biotechnology, including natural, regulatory, and social sciences;

EPA, FDA, and USDA should increase their use of pilot projects to advance understanding and use of ecological risk assessments and benefit analyses for future biotechnology products that are unfamiliar and complex and to prototype new approaches for iterative risk analyses that incorporate external peer review and public participation; and

The National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and other agencies that fund biotechnology research with the potential to lead to new biotechnology products should increase their investments in regulatory science and link research and education activities to regulatory-science activities.

The report is well written and contains a significant amount of new and valuable information on the types of new biotechnology products being innovated and coming into commerce, trends of note regarding future products, and regulatory gaps and redundancies that need to be addressed. This background information is clearly presented and supports well the conclusions that are essential to understand, and the recommendations that are in urgent need of response.

That the federal agencies tasked with regulating biotechnology products need increased funding and organizational retooling to address the challenges eloquently and convincingly described in the report are truths beyond dispute. In this political climate, and under this Administration, meeting these needs will be challenging. Shareholders of all sorts in the biotechnology area -- businesses, innovators, environmental and public health activists -- are urged to weigh in and express support for the allocation of resources needed to fulfill the reports recommendations. Future generations of biotechnology products are on the line and at risk if these recommendations fall on deaf ears.

2017 Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.

Continued here:
National Academies Report Finds Future Biotechnology Products May Overwhelm Agencies - The National Law Review

March 14, 2017 7:54am NASDAQ:IBB

From Zacks: 2016 was a tough year for biotech stocks with the sector facing a lot of criticism for rising drug prices. Although shares did rally post-election in November on hopes that drug pricing would not be a key focus area under a Donald Trump presidency, the rally turned out to be short-lived following the Presidents views regarding drug pricing.

Trump made it clear that he does not like what happened to drug prices and he will bring them down.

Drug pricing was not the only issue that impacted the sector last year 2016 was also disappointing from an R&D perspective with a fewer number drugs managing to gain FDA approval. There were some high-profile pipeline failures as well. Other factors that weighed on the sector include mixed results, slower-than-expected new product launches and increasing competition.

The impact of these issues resulted in the NASDAQ Biotechnology Index declining 19.1% in 2016. However, the sector is showing signs of recovery this year with the index gaining 12.4%year-to-date (YTD). (Read: Top-Ranked ETFs That Crushed S&P 500 in the Bull Market)

Drug Pricing Will Remain a Headline Risk

With drug pricing being a populist issue, it looks like the spotlight will remain on rising drug prices in 2017 as well. According to the Jan 2017 Kaiser Health Tracking poll, affordability of prescription drugs remains at the top of the publics priority list for the President and Congress focus should be on ensuring the affordability of high-cost drugs to people who need them and taking steps to lower prescription drug prices.

President Trumps recent tweet that he is working on a new system where there will be competition in the Drug Industry and pricing for the American people will come way down will keep the biotech industry on edge. While it is clear that the government intends to address the drug pricing issue, there is no clarity on what steps will be taken.

Biosimilars Pose a New Threat

Another challenge being faced by the sector is the recent entry of biosimilar competition in the U.S. While a relatively new area, the market for biosimilars is huge and highly lucrative with several blockbuster biologics including Humira and Lantus slated to lose patent protection by 2020. Biosimilars are expected to reduce healthcare costs and provide a large number of patients with access to much needed biologic treatments. Biosimilars are also gaining acceptance across formularies. (Read: Trumps Defense Spending Plans Make These ETFs Buys Again)

Deals to Pick Pace?

Licensing agreements and deals including those with opt-in arrangements should continue being signed with immuno-oncology remaining a favorite area. Moreover, major biotech and pharma companies should gain from Trumps proposed tax plan and proposal to repatriate corporate profits held offshore at a one-time tax rate.

Given the possibility of repatriation of funds, chances are that M&A activity will pick up as the year progresses big companies with deep pockets often look to replenish and boost their pipelines as well as portfolios by acquiring companies with innovative pipelines and technology. Meanwhile, small bolt-on acquisitions will continue. (Read: Play These Stocks & ETFs If Fed Acts in March)

Companies with innovative technologies and pipelines are highly sought after. Niche disease areas like nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), immuno-oncology and multiple sclerosis are in demand. Treatments for orphan diseases are also much sought after with quite a few deals being signed in these areas.

New Products Should Gain Traction

Highly-awaited new products that gained approval over the last couple of years should contribute significantly to revenues. The FDA approved 22 new drugs in 2016 including Exondys 51 (Duchenne muscular dystrophy), Epclusa (hepatitis C virus), Ocaliva (rare, chronic liver disease), Zinbryta (multiple sclerosis), and Venclexta (chronic lymphocytic leukemia in patients with a specific chromosomal abnormality) among others. The agency also expanded the label of cancer drugs like Kyprolis and Imbruvica.

Meanwhile, so far in 2017, the FDA has approved 5 new drugs including Trulance (treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation in adults) and Parsabiv (treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism in adult patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing dialysis).

ETFs in Focus

Highlighted below are some biotech ETFs ETFs present a low-cost and convenient way to get a diversified exposure to the sector.

iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology (IBB)

IBB, launched in Feb 2001 by BlackRock Investments LLC, tracks the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index. The fund mainly covers biotech stocks (81.6%) with pharma accounting for 10.8%, life sciences tools & services for 7.3%, Health care technology for 0.1%, Health care equipment for 0.11% and Health care supplies for 0.07%. The top 3 holdings include Amgen Inc. (9.23%), Celgene Corporation (7.72%) and Biogen Inc. (7.42%). The total assets of the fund as of Mar 7, 2017 were $8.38 billion representing 162 holdings. The funds expense ratio is 0.47% while dividend yield is 0.16%. The trading volume is roughly 1,491,728 shares per day.

SPDR S&P Biotech ETF (XBI)

XBI, launched in Jan 2006 by State Street Global Advisors, tracks the S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index. The fund covers health care stocks only. The top 3 holdings include ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (3.98%), Clovis Oncology, Inc. (3.76%), and ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (2.74%). The total assets of the fund as of Mar 8, 2017 were $2.9 billion representing 88 holdings. The funds expense ratio is 0.35% while dividend yield is 0.21%. The trading volume is roughly 4,427,722 shares per day.

First Trust NYSE Arca Biotech ETF (FBT)

FBT, launched in Jun 2006 by First Trust Advisors, tracks the NYSE Arca Biotechnology Index. The top 3 holdings include Kite Pharma, Inc. (4.77%), Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (3.98%) and Nektar Therapeutics (3.77%). The total assets of the fund as of Mar 7, 2017 were $902 million representing 30 holdings. The funds expense ratio is 0.55% while dividend yield is nil. The trading volume is roughly 44,417 shares per day.

VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH)

BBH, launched in Dec 2011 by Van Eck, tracks the Market Vectors US Listed Biotech 25 Index. The fund covers health care stocks. The top 3 holdings include Amgen Inc. (12.13%), Celgene Corporation (10.73%) and Gilead Sciences Inc. (10.72%). The total assets of the fund as of Mar 8, 2017 were $702.5 million representing 26 holdings. The funds expense ratio is 0.35% while dividend yield is 0.21%. The trading volume is roughly 50,198 shares per day.

PowerShares Dynamic Biotech & Genome ETF (PBE)

PBE, launched in Jun 2005 by Invesco PowerShares, tracks the Dynamic Biotech & Genome Intellidex Index. The top 3 holdings include Incyte Corporation (5.38%), Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. (5.19%), and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (5.1%). The total assets of the fund as of Mar 8, 2017 were $245.6 million representing 31 holdings. The funds expense ratio is 0.50% while dividend yield is 0.34%. The trading volume is roughly 27,517 shares per day.

Conclusion

Although it may take a while for the dust around the drug pricing issue to settle down, pipeline success in innovative and important therapeutic areas, cost-cutting, share buybacks, new products, increased pipeline visibility and appropriate utilization of cash should help restore investor confidence in biotech stocks.

The iShares NASDAQ Biotechnology Index ETF (NASDAQ:IBB) fell $0.66 (-0.22%) in premarket trading Tuesday. Year-to-date, IBB has gained 13.28%, versus a 6.39% rise in the benchmark S&P 500 index during the same period.

IBB currently has an ETF Daily News SMART Grade of A (Strong Buy), and is ranked #2 of 36 ETFs in the Health & Biotech ETFs category.

This article is brought to you courtesy of Zacks Research.

Tags: biotech Equity Health Care NASDAQ:IBB Zacks

Categories: NASDAQ:IBB

Continue reading here:
Have Biotech ETFs Finally Bottomed? - ETF Daily News (blog)

Market Summary Follow

Puma Biotechnology Inc is a A biopharmaceutical company

PBYI - Market Data & News

PBYI - Stock Valuation Report

Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) had a good day on the market for Monday March 13 as shares jumped 11.86% to close at $44.80. About 1.88 million shares traded hands on 13,031 trades for the day, compared with an average daily volume of 972,852 shares out of a total float of 36.95 million. After opening the trading day at $40.05, shares of Puma Biotechnology Inc stayed within a range of $45.20 to $39.80.

With today's gains, Puma Biotechnology Inc now has a market cap of $1.66 billion. Shares of Puma Biotechnology Inc have been trading within a range of $73.27 and $19.74 over the last year, and it had a 50-day SMA of $34.81 and a 200-day SMA of $42.33.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is a biopharmaceutical company. It is engaged in the acquisition, development and commercialization of products to enhance cancer care.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is based out of Los Angeles, CA and has some 160 employees. Its CEO is Alan H. Auerbach.

For a complete fundamental analysis of Puma Biotechnology Inc, check out Equities.coms Stock Valuation Analysis report for PBYI.

Want to invest with the experts? Subscribe to Equities Premium newsletters today! Visit http://www.equitiespremium.com/ to learn more about Guild Investments Market Commentary and Adam Sarhans Find Leading Stocks today.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is also a component of the Russell 2000. The Russell 2000 is one of the leading indices tracking small-cap companies in the United States. It's maintained by Russell Investments, an industry leader in creating and maintaining indices, and consists of the smallest 2000 stocks from the broader Russell 3000 index.

Russell's indices differ from traditional indices like the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) or S&P 500, whose members are selected by committee, because they base membership entirely on an objective, rules based methodology. The 3,000 largest companies by market cap make up the Russell 3000, with the 2,000 smaller companies making up the Russell 2000. It's a simple approach that gives a broad, unbiased look at the small-cap market as a whole.

To get more information on Puma Biotechnology Inc and to follow the companys latest updates, you can visit the companys profile page here: PBYIs Profile. For more news on the financial markets and emerging growth companies, be sure to visit Equities.coms Newsdesk. Also, dont forget to sign-up for our daily email newsletter to ensure you dont miss out on any of our best stories.

All data provided by QuoteMedia and was accurate as of 4:30PM ET.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions. To read our full disclosure, please go to: http://www.equities.com/disclaimer

Original post:
Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) Soars 11.86% on March 13 - Equities.com

On March 9, 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) announced the release (pre-publication version) of a new report:Preparing for Future Products of Biotechnology.Pursuant to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) July 2, 2015, memorandum, Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products, NAS was tasked with looking into the future and describing the possible future products of biotechnology that will arise over the next five to ten years, as well as providing some insights that can help shape the capabilities within the agencies as they move forward.

Via an ad hoc committee, the Committee on Future Biotechnology Products and Opportunities to Enhance Capabilities of the Biotechnology Regulatory System, NAS developed this report through several months of gathering and synthesizing information from several sources, including: 74 speakers over the course of three in-person meetings and eight webinars, including one presented by Lynn L. Bergeson; responses to its request for information from a dozen federal agencies; statements solicited from members of the public at its in-person meetings; written comments through the duration of the study; and recent NAS studies related to future products of biotechnology.

The report presents conclusions concerning the future biotechnology products themselves, as well the challenges that federal agencies will face in regulating them, which include:

The bioeconomy is growing rapidly and the U.S. regulatory system needs to provide a balanced approach for consideration of the many competing interests in the face of this expansion;

The profusion of biotechnology products over the next five to ten years has the potential to overwhelm the U.S. regulatory system, which may be exacerbated by a disconnect between research in regulatory science and expected uses of future biotechnology products;

Regulators will face difficult challenges as they grapple with a broad array of new types of bio-technology products -- for example, cosmetics, toys, pets, and office supplies -- that go beyond contained industrial uses and traditional environmental release;

The safe use of new biotechnology products requires rigorous, predictable, and transparent risk-analysis processes whose comprehensiveness, depth, and throughput mirror the scope, scale, complexity, and tempo of future biotechnology applications.

The report provides three recommendations for federal agencies in responding to these challenges, which it states should be taken to enhance the ability of the biotechnology regulatory system to oversee the consumer safety and environmental protection required for future biotechnology products:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and other agencies involved in regulation of future bio-technology products should increase scientific capabilities, tools, expertise, and horizon scanning in key areas of expected growth of biotechnology, including natural, regulatory, and social sciences.

EPA, FDA, and USDA should increase their use of pilot projects to advance understanding and use of ecological risk assessments and benefit analyses for future biotechnology products that are unfamiliar and complex and to prototype new approaches for iterative risk analyses that incorporate external peer review and public participation.

The National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and other agencies that fund bio-technology research with the potential to lead to new biotechnology products should increase their investments in regulatory science and link research and education activities to regulatory-science activities.

The report is well-written and contains an impressive amount of new, relevant, and important information. The Committee participants are to be commended for an important new piece of scholarship in this area.

The reports conclusions are also significant, but not entirely unexpected.For those of us working in this space, we have recognized for years the lack of clarity regarding jurisdictional boundaries, the paucity of government resources, and the urgent need for regulatory clarity and significantly enhanced funding. Unfortunately, given current Trump Administration efforts to diminish government funding for EPA, FDA, and elsewhere, the well-crafted and spot-on recommendations may tragically fall on deaf ears.Shareholders should carefully review the report and work hard to ensure the recommendations are implemented. The consequences of failing to increase scientific capabilities, tools, expertise, and horizon scanning in key areas of expected growth of biotechnology, including natural regulatory, and social sciences -- the number one recommendation in the report -- are too great to ignore.

2017 Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.

Link:
NAS Issues Report on Preparing for Future Products of ... - The National Law Review

The Portuguese Minister of Science and Technology, Manuel Heitor, say his country will offer technical support to Nigeria in key biotechnology activities that will enhance tropical agriculture and food security.

Heitor made this known in a statement made available to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) by the Head, Protocol and Communications, National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA), Ifeoma Ndefo on Monday in Abuja.

The minister visited the Director-General, National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA), LucyOgbadu, with a team of experts in different fields of biotechnology from various institutions in Portugal.

In his address, Heitor indicated interest of the Portuguese delegation in partnering with the NABDA on efforts to expand technologies that would enhance tropical agriculture and food security.

The minister,who is also the minister of Education, declared the interest of his country in assisting NABDA scientific officers wishing to acquire Masters and P.HD degrees in Portugal.

He identified areas of NABDAs activities akin to their fields of competencessuch as cancer prevention, stem cell research, Biogas production (converting wastes to generate electricity) and bio-remediation.

Heitor said all of thesewere areas of interest for collaboration as well as knowledge sharing between their institutions and NABDA.

On her part, Director-General, NABDA, commended the minister and his team for their interest to partner with the Agency and to ensure that Nigeria reaps the potential benefit that biotechnology offers.

The NABDA boss highlighted the various projects and activities of the five technical departments of the Agency.

This included the six Centres of Excellence located at frontline universities of the each of the Six Geo-political Zones of the nation (Uni-Jos, ABU Zaria, Uni- Port, UNN, Uni-Ibadan and Uni- Maiduguri).

Others are the NABDAs Bioresources Centres (BioDecs) spread across twenty-five states of the federation.

The News Agency of Nigeria recalls that the agency was established by the Federal Government to implement policy aimed at promoting, coordinating, and setting research and development priority in biotechnology for Nigeria.

NAN.

Read this article:
Portugal to support Nigeria in Biotechnology activities - TV360 Nigeria - TV360

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwired - March 13, 2017) -

NOT FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

Editors Note: There is a photo associated with this press release.

Woodrose Ventures Corporation (TSX VENTURE:WRS.H) ("Woodrose" or the "Company") is pleased to announce that it has entered into an agreement (the "Agreement") dated March 10, 2017 to acquire all of the shares of Novoheart Holdings Ltd. ("Novoheart"), a global stem cell biotechnology company dedicated to human heart engineering (the "Transaction"). Novoheart develops products and provides services focused on engineering prototypes of bio-artificial human heart tissues and chambers for drug discovery, cardiotoxicity screening, disease modelling and therapeutic applications.

The Transaction will constitute a "reverse-takeover" of Woodrose in accordance with the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange (the "TSXV") and the reactivation of Woodrose, which is currently a NEX-listed issuer.

About Novoheart

Novoheart is a global stem cell biotechnology company headquartered in Hong Kong with R&D Innovation Centres being set up in the United States. Novoheart's mission is to revolutionize drug discovery and the development of heart therapeutics with its range of proprietary bioengineered human heart constructs, collectively known as the MyHeart platform, and to further develop them into transplantable heart grafts for cell-based regenerative therapies with superior safety and efficacy. Its scientific team has pioneered a range of best-in-class bioengineering technologies and constructed the world's first human mini-heart "novoHeart" with which the Novoheart team intends to revolutionize:

1) Pre-clinical drug discovery, cardiotoxicity screening and heart disease modelling;

2) Post-discovery, clinical development of novel therapeutics; and

3) Pre-clinical and clinical development of cell-based cardiac regenerative therapies.

Novoheart's immediate focus is to innovate and accelerate the lengthy, expensive and inefficient drug development process. The development of a new drug candidate typically costs US$2-4bn and takes 10+ years (Tufts Centre for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts CSDD R&D Cost Study 2014) with extremely poor success rates of <1% of initial drug candidates making it to market (Willmann et al. 2008, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 7, 591-607). The primary cause for drug withdrawal and attrition is heart toxicity. Despite substantial pre-human R&D costs (~30% of the entire process), conventional non-human and non-cardiac cell and animal models are poorly predictive of human responses, leading to false negative and false positive pre-clinical results that compromise the overall successes (Chen et al. 2016, Nature Reviews Cardiology 13, 333-349).

Novoheart's intellectual property portfolio, including the human "heart-in-a-jar" (novoHeart) and other related next-generation technologies of the MyHeart platform (see figure below) are unique solutions that help bridge the gap between pre-clinical and clinical drug trials. The MyHeart platform provides advanced human heart surrogates for pre-screening of drug formulas and the elimination of toxic compounds early on in the drug development process, minimizing the risk towards patients. Significantly, the MyHeart Platform provides real time data on the effects of drug formulations enabling drug development companies to undertake "on-the-fly" reformulation of drug candidates to optimize efficacy and toxicological profiles. With Novoheart's technologies, we aim to significantly reduce pre-clinical R&D time and costs, and importantly, improve trial successes. It is anticipated that drug screening results using Novoheart's human engineered tissues would be accepted as reliable indicators for toxicity and efficacy, thereby qualifying the test compounds for accelerated drug development.

Novoheart adopts a hybrid business model by:

These products and services are designed to significantly reduce the time, cost, and use of animal models, as well as improve patient safety, and facilitate pharmaceutical discovery and development. Novoheart is currently working with leading academic and pharmaceutical partners to innovate drug discovery and toxicity screening protocols. Our targeted clients are pharmaceutical companies, government units, and research institutions.

Novoheart was incorporated in 2014 pursuant to the laws of British Virgin Islands (BVI) and its controlling shareholder is Medera Group Limited, a BVI entity. Novoheart has one wholly owned Hong Kong subsidiary "Novoheart Limited" ("Novoheart Hong Kong") which is the group operating entity.

Novoheart Hong Kong was incorporated in January 2014 by founder and CEO Prof. Ronald Li, with scientific co-founders Prof. Kevin Costa and Prof. Michelle Khine.

Novoheart's foundational technologies are the direct outcome of over 15 years of research effort supported by R&D investments amounting to approximately USD30MM. These research efforts, performed at Johns Hopkins University, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, University of California Irvine, University of California Davis, and the University of Hong Kong by our scientific founders, have received major recognitions such as American Heart Association's Best Study of 2005, Ground-breaking Study of 2006, and Late-breaking Studies of 2002, 2003, 2005 and 2007, and the Spirit of Hong Kong Innovating for Good Award in 2015. The "human-heart-in-a-jar" technology was selected by Google's Solve For X as a Moonshot Project in 2015.

Novoheart's scientific founders and advisors are renowned pioneering leaders in the stem cell and cardiac space, with a successful track record in developing and commercializing ground-breaking technologies. In September 2014, Novoheart established its R&D base and office in the Hong Kong Science Park, where it continues to innovate solutions for drug discovery and human heart tissue engineering.

In December 2014, Novoheart signed a strategic partnership with a major global pharmaceutical company (the "Global Pharma Partner") headquartered in New York City to validate the MyHeart platform. The success of this validation process has resulted in follow on income-generating projects.

In January 2015, Novoheart's R&D proposal to develop bio-artificial heart tissues for drug screening received 50/50 matched funding from the Innovation & Technology Commission (ITC) of the Government of Hong Kong, with a total project cost of over HK$21MM over 2 years. It was also the largest biotech project granted by ITC for that year. Novoheart owns all of the intellectual property generated from this project, and as a result of the R&D, Novoheart has applied or is in the application process for 3 new patents covering newly developed technology, including the human ventricular cardiac anisotropic sheet (hvCAS) as a powerful tool for detecting drug-induced arrhythmias with the results published in the prestigious international peer-reviewed bioengineering journal Advanced Materials (Shum et al. 2017, Advanced Materials, 29). Additionally, Novoheart holds exclusive worldwide licenses or options to acquire the same for technologies that constitute its MyHeart platform and future developments.

In December 2015, Novoheart signed a second contract with the Global Pharma Partner to build disease-specific engineered human heart tissues and chambers for drug discovery. The total project cost is US$726,000 over 1.5 years.

In February 2017, the Corporate Venture Fund (CVF) of the Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks Corporation (HKSTPC) completed an equity investment of approximately US$250,000 into Novoheart and an additional investment would be made at the Transaction.

Novoheart Financial Information

The following table includes a summary of certain financial information of Novoheart and is derived from its financial statements for the years ended June 30, 2016 and June 30, 2015.

Summary of the Transaction

Under the terms of the Agreement, the shareholders of Novoheart will receive an aggregate of 66,086,600 common shares of Woodrose on a post-Consolidation basis (see below) ("Woodrose Post-Consolidation Shares"). In addition, a finder's fee of 2,313,038 Woodrose Post-Consolidation Shares will be paid to Cynosure Private Equity Limited in connection with the Transaction.

In connection with the Transaction, Woodrose intends to complete a consolidation of all its outstanding common shares on the basis of 3.56878449 old common shares for each one new common share (the "Consolidation"). In addition, Woodrose intends to complete a non-brokered private placement (the "Private Placement") of 11,700,000 subscription receipts ("Subscription Receipts") at a price of CDN$0.50 per Subscription Receipt to raise gross proceeds of CDN$5,850,000, which will be held in escrow in accordance with the terms of a subscription receipt agreement (the "Subscription Receipt Agreement"). It is anticipated that the Subscription Receipt Agreement will provide that, upon completion of the Transaction, each Subscription Receipt will automatically convert into one Woodrose Post-Consolidation Share. The Subscription Receipt Agreement will also provide that, in the event the Transaction is terminated or does not complete within an agreed timeframe, the Subscription Receipts will be cancelled and the funds will be returned to the holders. Woodrose may pay cash fees in an amount not to exceed 7% of the gross proceeds (to a maximum of $364,000) to certain finders involved in the Private Placement and may issue finder's warrants ("Finder's Warrants"), in an amount not to exceed 7% of the number of Subscription Receipts issued (to a maximum of 728,000 Finders Warrants) each of which would entitle the holder to acquire one Woodrose Post-Consolidation Share at a price of CDN$0.50 for a period of two years following closing of the Private Placement. All securities issued pursuant to the Private Placement will be subject to a statutory hold period of four months and one day.

The Company intends to use the net proceeds of the offering to finance investment in drug discovery and screening, establish commercial partnerships, expand the current laboratory, hire additional research and development team members and for working capital and general corporate purposes.

Upon completion of the Transaction, it is anticipated that the Company will be classified as a Tier 2 Technology Issuer on the TSXV and will change its name to "Novoheart Holdings (BC) Limited" or such other name as is acceptable to the Board of Directors. Closing of the Transaction ("Closing") is subject to conditions precedent, that include, but are not limited to, the following:

The Transaction is an "arm's length" transaction (as defined by the policies of the TSXV). Woodrose intends to rely an exemption from the sponsorship requirements of the policies of the TSXV.

Proposed Management Team

Upon closing of the Transaction, the following directors and senior officers are anticipated to be appointed in replacement of Woodrose's current board and management:

Prof. Ronald Li, B.Sc. (Hons), Ph.D. (Proposed President, Chief Executive Officer and Director)

Prof. Ronald Li is a co-founder of Novoheart, and has been serving as the CEO since 2016. He is concurrently Director of Ming-Wai Lau Centre for Reparative Medicine, HK node, Karolinska Institutet (KI), Sweden, with a professorial cross appointment at the Dr. Li Dak-Sum Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong (HKU)-KI Collaboration in Regenerative Medicine of HKU. Prof. Li has been an advocate of stem cell technology for many years, starting from his career as Assistant Professor of Cardiology, and Cellular and Molecular Medicine at the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) School of Medicine. He founded and led the Human Embryonic Stem Cell Consortium when he was recruited in 2005 to become a tenured Associate Professor at the University of California, Davis, in light of state's USD3-billion stem cell initiative Proposition 71. Prof. Li was the Founding Director of the Stem Cell & Regenerative Medicine Consortium (SCRMC) at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) from 2010 to 2015. He also co-directed the Section of Cardiovascular Cell & Tissue Engineering in Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai with Prof. Kevin Costa. Prof. Li has received multiple accolades and recognitions during his career, including the Spirit of Hong Kong Innovating for Good Award by the South China Morning Post (2015), the Top Young Faculty Award (2002, 2004), the Top Prize for the Young Investigator Basic Research (2001) and Top Postdoctoral Fellow Helen Taussig Award (2001) of JHU School of Medicine, Young Investigator Award 1st Prize from the Heart Rhythm Society (2002), and the Career Development Award from the Cardiac Arrhythmias Research & Education Foundation (2001).

Prof. Li graduated with his B.S. with honors in Biotechnology from University of Waterloo, Ontario, on Dean's List and his Ph.D. in Cardiology/Physiology at the University of Toronto.

Dr. Camie Chan, B.Sc. (Hons), M.Sc., Ph.D. (Proposed Chief Operating Officer and Director)

Dr. Camie Chan joined Novoheart Hong Kong as the Chief Operating Officer in 2016, after having served at HKU as the Deputy Director of the Faculty of Medicine Core Facility, a founding member of the Management Committee of the Stem Cell & Regenerative Medicine Consortium (SCRMC), and Assistant Professor in the Department of Anatomy, between 2010 and 2016. She has had extensive experience managing laboratory operations in her capacity at HKU, and her prior career as Assistant Professor at the University of California, Davis, and Assistant Investigator at the Shriners Hospital for Children. Dr. Chan is also a co-inventor of technology allowing mass production of human ventricular heart cells from pluripotent stem cells.

Dr. Chan graduated with her B.Sc. with honors at the University of Waterloo, followed by obtaining her M.Sc. degree in Medical Sciences and Ph.D. degree in Immunology at the University of Toronto, Canada. She then received postdoctoral training at the Sydney Kimmel Cancer Research Center at the Johns Hopkins University. She has garnered numerous awards in her career, including the prestigious National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Developmental Research Grant Award.

Prof. Kevin Costa, B.S., Ph.D. (Proposed Chief Scientific Officer)

Prof. Costa is Director of the Section of Cardiovascular Cell and Tissue Engineering at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City. Prof. Costa was previously trained at the Johns Hopkins University and on the faculty as Associate Professor of Biomedical Engineering at Columbia University. As a "blue-blood" biomedical engineering (BME) expert (B.S. and M.S. in BME from Boston University, Ph.D. in BME from UC San Diego, and postdoc in BME from JHU and University of Washington) in cell and tissue biomechanics and cardiac tissue engineering, he has developed one of the first engineered cardiac tissue systems. Since 2009, he has been working with Prof. Ronald Li to translate such systems into human cells. Prof. Costa has received research funding from the Whitaker Foundation, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH; NHLBI, NIBIB, and NIGMS). He was also a recipient of the prestigious Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Award from the NSF. Prof. Costa is an inventor of several cardiac tissue engineering technologies and one of the scientific co-founders of Novoheart Hong Kong.

Ms. Iris Lo, B. Comm. (Hons), CPA, CA (Proposed Chief Financial Officer)

Ms. Lo is a seasoned professional with expertise in corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions, accounting, and finance. Prior to joining Novoheart, Ms. Lo was the Director of Corporate Development & Analysis at Cardiome Pharma Corp., a Canadian public company dually listed on the TSX and NASDAQ (TSX: COM, NASDAQ: CRME). At Cardiome, she held responsibilities in equity and debt financing, corporate mergers and acquisitions, product licensing and distributions, financial planning and analysis, as well as regulatory and risk management. During her tenure at Cardiome, Ms. Lo participated in transactions totaling over US$240 million as Cardiome grew from a company with a market capitalization of US$25 million to over US$150 million at its peak. She brings with her valuable experience from the life sciences and pharmaceutical sector, as well as expertise in dealing with the complexities of operating and financing public corporations. Ms. Lo was also previously a Manager in the Transaction Services team at PwC Hong Kong and began her career articling with KPMG Vancouver. She is a Chartered Professional Accountant and holds a Bachelor of Commerce (Honours) from the Sauder School of Business at the University of British Columbia.

Mr. Victor Chang (Proposed Director)

Mr. Chang is a seasoned investor who has lately become focused on start-ups. Mr. Chang started his career with Lippo Securities Limited in 1996 and became a Director of Grand International Holdings Limited in 1999, which was engaged in general investments. During the period from 2007 to 2009, he was a Director and Responsible Officer for Astrum Capital Management Limited carrying out regulated activities under the Securities and Futures Ordinance ("SFO", Cap. 571, Laws of Hong Kong) and with Murtsa Capital Partners Limited as well. During the period from 2007 to 2012, he was also a compliance consultant for Astrum Capital Management Limited. As co-founder and Managing Director of Zebra Strategic Outsource Solution, he has over 16 years of experience in recruitment process outsourcing, executive search as well as and private investment management. In Apil 2013, he successfully brought Zebra Strategic Holdings Limited which offers holistic HR solutions to IPO on the HK GEM board (Stock Code: 8260) and was re-designated as and is currently a Non-Executive Director with the company. He is currently a Director and Responsible Officer of Dakin Financial Group, a corporation licensed to carry out type 1, 2 & 9 regulated activity under the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Ordinance.

Mr. Tong Ricky Chiu (Proposed Director)

As a key founder and visionary for Grand Power Logistics Group Inc., which was listed on the TSX Venture Exchange (GPW.V) before its privatization in 2016, and Baoshinn International Express Ltd., Mr. Chiu adds value with his immense corporate development and growth skills. He received his education in Oxford University, England, and Beijing University, and began his career in Australia. He has a diversified background in a wide range of industries with roles in finance, audit, real estate, merchandise trading and travel, as well as logistics.

Mr. James Topham (Proposed Director)

Mr. Topham is an experienced executive with expertise in finance, accounting, auditing and entrepreneurial technology companies. He was an audit partner leading KPMG's Technology Group in the Vancouver office for 20 years where he worked with many fast growing public companies and was involved in many M&A and IPO transactions in Canada, the US and Europe. Mr. Topham founded Social Venture Partners Vancouver in 2001 with a mission to strengthen the organizational capacity of innovative non-profits serving children in-need and youth at-risk. It has funded several million dollars and provided thousands of hours of executive time mentoring these local non-profits. Since retiring at KPMG 7 years ago, Mr. Topham has worked on several Boards of both public and private technology companies. He received a lifetime achievement award from the BC Technology Industry Association and was awarded the designation of Fellow Chartered Public Accountant (FCPA) from the Chartered Public Accountants of BC for his career achievements in the profession and community. He was a founder and Board member for 9 years of the BC Technology Industry Association that represents the technology industry in BC. Mr. Topham is a CPA and has a Bachelor of Commerce degree with Honours from the University of Saskatchewan graduating as the most distinguished graduate in the College of Commerce.

Mr. Allen Ma (Proposed Director)

As a 30-year technology industry veteran, Mr. Ma was the CEO of Hong Kong Science & Technology Parks before he retired in July 2016. He held senior executive positions within the information and communications technology sector. His past roles include president for Asia-Pacific at British Telecom, vice-president for Asia at the global telecom solutions sector of Motorola, executive director of Hong Kong Telecommunications - subsequently called Cable & Wireless HKT - and managing director of Hong Kong Telecom CSL. Ma holds an MBA from the University of Toronto and is a fellow member of both the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, UK and the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, UK. He is also a Certified Management Accountant of Canada.

Proposed Advisory Team

Novoheart is supported by a Scientific Advisory Board whose proposed composition consists of eminent scientists renowned in the fields of stem cells, cardiac biology and physiology, tissue engineering, and clinical cardiology including clinical trials research, from top academic research institutes in the U.S.A. Their technical expertise will guide the development of Novoheart as a forerunner in the application of cutting-edge technologies to develop new and better treatments for heart disease and beyond.

Further Details

Both the Company and Novoheart intend to work diligently to complete the conditions precedent to Closing and anticipate completion of the Transaction in the second quarter of 2017. The Company will update its shareholders with further details as they become available.

ON BEHALF OF WOODROSE VENTURES CORPORATION

Darren Devine, President, CEO and Director

NEITHER THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE NOR ITS REGULATION SERVICES PROVIDER (AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED IN THE POLICIES OF THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE) ACCEPTS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.

Completion of the Transaction is subject to a number of conditions, including but not limited to, Exchange acceptance and if applicable pursuant to Exchange requirements, majority shareholder approval. Where applicable, the Transaction cannot close until the required shareholder approval is obtained. There can be no assurance that the Transaction will be completed as proposed or at all.

Investors are cautioned that, except as disclosed in the Filing Statement to be prepared in connection with the Transaction, any information with respect to the Transaction may not be accurate or complete and should not be relied on. Trading in securities of the Company should be considered highly speculative.

The TSX Venture Exchange has in no way passed upon the merits of the Transaction and has neither approved nor disproved the contents of this news release.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

Information set forth in this news release may involve forward-looking statements under applicable securities laws. Forward-looking statements are statements that relate to future, not past, events. In this context, forward-looking statements often address expected future business and financial performance, and often contain words such as "anticipate", "believe", "plan", "estimate", "expect", and "intend", statements that an action or event "may", "might", "could", "should", or "will" be taken or occur, or other similar expressions. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, included herein including, without limitation; statements about the terms and completion of the Transaction are forward-looking statements. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements, or other future events, to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, the following risks: failure to satisfy all conditions precedent to the Transaction, including shareholder approval, approval of the TSX Venture Exchange and completion of the necessary financings and the additional risks identified in the management discussion and analysis section of Woodrose Corporation's interim and most recent annual financial statement or other reports and filings with the TSX Venture Exchange and applicable Canadian securities regulators. Forward-looking statements are made based on management's beliefs, estimates and opinions on the date that statements are made and the respective companies undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements if these beliefs, estimates and opinions or other circumstances should change, except as required by applicable securities laws. Investors are cautioned against attributing undue certainty to forward-looking statements.

To view the photo associated with this press release, please visit the following link: http://www.marketwire.com/library/20170312-1088577_MyHeart_800.jpg

Read the original post:
Woodrose Ventures Corporation Announces Proposed Acquisition ... - Marketwired (press release)

Puma Biotechnology (PBYI) Reaches $44.80 After 9.00% Up Move, Carbo Ceramics (CRR) Shorts Increased By 9.82% HuronReport The stock of Puma Biotechnology Inc (NASDAQ:PBYI) is a huge mover today! The stock increased 11.86% or $4.75 during the last trading session, reaching $44.8. About 1.53 million shares traded or 33.04% up from the average. Puma Biotechnology Inc ... and more »

Here is the original post:
Puma Biotechnology (PBYI) Reaches $44.80 After 9.00% Up Move, Carbo Ceramics (CRR) Shorts Increased By 9.82% - HuronReport

Federal US agencies need to prepare for greater quantity, range of biotechnology products Science Daily A profusion of biotechnology products is expected over the next five to 10 years, and the number and diversity of new products has the potential to overwhelm the U.S. regulatory system, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences ...

Visit link:
Federal US agencies need to prepare for greater quantity, range of biotechnology products - Science Daily

Written by ANJALI MARAR | Pune | Published:March 11, 2017 2:20 am

GOOD TIMES seem to have arrived at least for the countrys biotechnology sector that has been awarded the highest budgetary hike in this years union budget. Though there has been an overall 10 per cent hike in the total budget allotted for science, biotechnology and earth sciences this year, it is the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) that has won the jackpot by being awarded the highest hike to Rs 2,222 crore as opposed to Rs 1,917 crore received last year. While Rs 37,435 crore has been allotted for science and technology this year, the same stood at Rs 33,467 crore in the 2016-2017 budget. Scientists in the city have given mixed reactions to this years budget as some are of the opinion that there is little clarity or specific plans mentioned for taking forward the ambitious Make in India and Start-Up India initiatives from these research fields.

Watch what else is making news:

Its indeed a welcome move that DBT has been awarded higher amount of money this year. However, the budget is disappointing as there was no concrete plan or budgetary allocations for Start-Ups made, said Rajendra Jagdale, director general of Science and Technology Park . The monetary allocations for the current financial years activities for other scientific departments are Department of Science and Technology has bagged Rs 4,833 crore; Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) has been awarded Rs 4,446 crore while the Ministry of Earth Sciences (MoES) has been allotted Rs 1,723 crore.

However, eminent scientist and former director of CSIR-National Chemical Laboratory (NCL) RA Mashelkar, lauded the governments initiatives. He said, The governments priorities in scientific research seems to be heading in the right direction. He was particularly happy about start-ups , which according to him, will help India take a lead position in job creation. The aim is to get to the top position in start-ups which in turn can create more jobs. So from a job-seeker role, the country is progressing to that of a job-creator, said Mashelkar. Improving waste management, developing cost-effective bio-medical devices, improved research in scientific heritage research, electronic mobility are some of key the areas where greater emphasis is being given by DST . Industrial research will also be focusing on science and technology intervention for solving problems of common man.

According to another senior scientist, who did not wish to divulge his identity, the field of biotechnology has always been greatly dependent on the pharmaceutical industry for its survival. This needs to change, as there is much beyond pharmaceutical, only then can better research related to real life sciences will come to the fore, he said.

Here is the original post:
More funds to flow into Department of Biotechnology's kitty | The ... - The Indian Express

While the broader stock market fell Monday, many biotech shares continued to outperform.

The big mover was TG Therapeutics Inc. TGTX, -6.88% which soared 90% after releasing positive results from its Phase 3 clinical trial of its treatment for high-risk leukemia patients. The stock closed up $4.85 to $10.20 on 33.7 million shares, which is 34 times its daily average. The stock blew through several layers of resistance, but pulled back at the close below resistance from the April high at around $10.50. A breakthrough there should get the stock to $13 and then $15. Support is at the days low of $9.10 and then $8. Short interest of 22 times its average volume could accelerate the advance.

Concert Pharmaceuticals Inc. CNCE, +5.11% rocketed 62% Monday on news that Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. VRTX, +0.94% will be acquiring the companys cystic fibrosis drug, CTP-656. The stock closed at $15.64, up $5.99, at around the mid-range of the days action, which bodes well for a follow-through. Volume of 10.5 million shares was more than 85 times its average. Watch for a retest the days intraday high at $18.48, a breakthrough that could get the stock moving to test its highs from November 2015 at just under $25.

Kite Pharma Inc. KITE, +1.90% which we highlighted in our biotech article on Friday, followed through on Monday, up $1.37 to $73.90. FBR Capital mentioned the company in a research note in which it said that potential tax reform and FDA policy changes under President Trump could fuel acquisitions of clinical-stage biotech companies. RBC Capital Markets boosted its price target from $85 to $95. KITE surged last week after the company released a favorable earnings report and positive clinical data on its lead product candidate for treating patients with rare forms of blood cancer. Pulling back slightly on Thursday and Friday, the stock is now in a high-level mini-wedge formation, a break of which could lead to the next target at $90.

Amicus Therapeutics Inc. FOLD, +2.85% was relatively flat on Monday, down just 10 cents to $7.69, but is looking strong. As we noted in our article Friday, the stock rocketed 17% on Wednesday after the company CEOs daughter, Megan Crowley, who has Pompe disease, was highlighted during President Trumps address to Congress Tuesday night. The stock has broken out of a mini-consolidation pattern and across lateral resistance from its December high. At its intraday highs last week, the stock nearly reached the level it was at before its big gap down in December. If it can fill that gap, watch for a move next to $9.50.

Among other biotechs to watch, Supernus Pharmaceuticals Inc. SUPN, +5.30% reached a new all-time at $30.37 on Monday, before closing at $29.75, still up $1 in a down market. The drugmaker has been rallying in the past week since topping analysts forecasts in its fourth-quarter report last Wednesday. Watch for $32-$33 in the short term.

Foundation Medicine Inc. FMI, +2.49% gained $3, or 10.6%, to $31.30 on no news Monday. Stock in the diagnostic cancer analyses company has been up six days in a row since closing at $23.10 on Feb. 24. The rally has broken the stock out of a falling wedge pattern. Our initial target of $29 was exceeded Monday, and next target is near $35.

See Harrys video-chart analysis on these stocks.

The writer has no holdings in any securities mentioned.

Harry Boxer is founder of TheTechTrader.com, a live trading room featuring his stock picks, technical market analysis, and live chart presentations.

Link:
Opinion: Harry Boxer's six biotechnology stocks to watch - MarketWatch

Market Summary Follow

Puma Biotechnology Inc is a A biopharmaceutical company

PBYI - Market Data & News

PBYI - Stock Valuation Report

Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) had a good day on the market for Wednesday March 08 as shares jumped 13.2% to close at $40.30. About 2.55 million shares traded hands on 18,346 trades for the day, compared with an average daily volume of 947,962 shares out of a total float of 36.95 million. After opening the trading day at $35.55, shares of Puma Biotechnology Inc stayed within a range of $41.15 to $35.10.

With today's gains, Puma Biotechnology Inc now has a market cap of $1.49 billion. Shares of Puma Biotechnology Inc have been trading within a range of $73.27 and $19.74 over the last year, and it had a 50-day SMA of $34.39 and a 200-day SMA of $42.20.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is a biopharmaceutical company. It is engaged in the acquisition, development and commercialization of products to enhance cancer care.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is based out of Los Angeles, CA and has some 160 employees. Its CEO is Alan H. Auerbach.

For a complete fundamental analysis of Puma Biotechnology Inc, check out Equities.coms Stock Valuation Analysis report for PBYI.

Want to invest with the experts? Subscribe to Equities Premium newsletters today! Visit http://www.equitiespremium.com/ to learn more about Guild Investments Market Commentary and Adam Sarhans Find Leading Stocks today.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is also a component of the Russell 2000. The Russell 2000 is one of the leading indices tracking small-cap companies in the United States. It's maintained by Russell Investments, an industry leader in creating and maintaining indices, and consists of the smallest 2000 stocks from the broader Russell 3000 index.

Russell's indices differ from traditional indices like the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) or S&P 500, whose members are selected by committee, because they base membership entirely on an objective, rules based methodology. The 3,000 largest companies by market cap make up the Russell 3000, with the 2,000 smaller companies making up the Russell 2000. It's a simple approach that gives a broad, unbiased look at the small-cap market as a whole.

To get more information on Puma Biotechnology Inc and to follow the companys latest updates, you can visit the companys profile page here: PBYIs Profile. For more news on the financial markets and emerging growth companies, be sure to visit Equities.coms Newsdesk. Also, dont forget to sign-up for our daily email newsletter to ensure you dont miss out on any of our best stories.

All data provided by QuoteMedia and was accurate as of 4:30PM ET.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions. To read our full disclosure, please go to: http://www.equities.com/disclaimer

Go here to read the rest:
Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) Soars 13.2% on March 08 - Equities.com

By Serge Berger, Head Trader & Strategist, The Steady Trader|Mar 7, 2017, 8:02 am EST Popular Posts: Recent Posts:

Biotechnology stocks as represented by theiShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF)(NASDAQ:IBB) have rallied 13% year-to-date. Thats notable considering that over the past 12 months, the IBB ETF has only rallied by about 14%.

Many traders in recent days have pointed to the continued strength in biotech stocks as a sign that the broader market is not yet ready to roll over. But it is notable that the IBB, as a result of the recent rally, has now reached an important technical level on the charts that may offer better technical resistance.

A simple yet effective trick that I repeatedly use to gauge the internal strength of the broader stock market is by checking the pulse of the so calledrisk-on groups. While these groups change over the years, they often include technology and financial stocks. In recent years, biotech, tech as a whole and small-cap stocks, among others, have led the risk-on pack.

Over the past few weeks, biotech stocks and the IBB ETF have showed both absolute and relative strength versus the broader stock market. Through this lens, one could argue that it is premature to get too defensive on the stock market in the near-term and possibly the intermediate-term until biotech stocks begin to back off some.

When I last discussed the state of biotech stocks on Feb. 1,I offered that the IBBs bullish reversal from Jan. 31 could be the beginning of a next swing higher with price targets in the$285-$290 area. Two weeks later, the upper end of this price target had been reached, and last week the IBB ETF further extended this rally into the $300 level.

Now, lets look at the charts.

On the multiyear weekly chart, we see that this recent rally has brought the IBB back to the very upper end of a sideways channel, which now also lines up with the 100-week simple moving average (blue).

Click to Enlarge

This confluence of technical resistance around the $300 area could provide a more meaningful challenge to be overcome.

Next Page

Article printed from InvestorPlace Media, http://investorplace.com/2017/03/ishares-nasdaq-biotechnology-index-etf-ibb-is-at-a-crossroads/.

2017 InvestorPlace Media, LLC

Excerpt from:
iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF) (IBB) Is at a Crossroads - Investorplace.com

The Cerbat Gem

RBC Capital Markets Cuts Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) Price Target to $17.00 The Cerbat Gem Puma Biotechnology Inc logo Puma Biotechnology Inc (NYSE:PBYI) had its target price reduced by RBC Capital Markets from $48.00 to $17.00 in a research note issued to investors on Thursday morning. They currently have a sector perform rating on the ... Puma Biotechnology Shares Plunge On Plans To Modify Neratinib European MAA, Competitor Roche's Perjeta WinBenzinga The Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) Price Target Cut to $17.00 by Analysts at RBC Capital MarketsDailyQuint Puma Biotechnology Inc Realized Volatility Hits A Notable HighCML News Smarter Analyst -Yahoo Finance -Sports Perspectives all 96 news articles »

Read more from the original source:
RBC Capital Markets Cuts Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) Price Target to $17.00 - The Cerbat Gem

SIOUX FALLS Sen. John Thune (RS.D.) has been named Legislator of the Year from the international Biotechnology Innovation Organizations Industrial & Environmental Health Section.

The award recognizes Senator Thunes support of the biotechnology industry and steadfast commitment to growing South Dakotas and the nations bio-based economy.

Thunes award was presented by Doug Berven, a member of BIOs governing board and vice president of corporate affairs at Sioux Falls-based POET, and Brent Erickson, executive vice president of BIOs Industrial & Environmental Section.

Sen. John Thune has been a strong and constant champion of policies that support industrial biotechnology companies in creating jobs, revitalizing manufacturing, improving U.S. energy security and building a bio-based economy, Erickson said.

Senator Thune was first elected to the Senate in 2004, when the first Renewable Fuel Standard was under development. He helped expand the program in 2007 and has been a determined advocate in encouraging the Environmental Protection Agency to get the program on track for future growth.

Thune also was recognized helping renew tax credits for second-generation biofuels and for co-sponsoring legislation to ensure mandatory funding for energy programs in the Agriculture Act of 2014.

Through his efforts, Congress has incorporated innovative programs in the Farm bill to spur the development of biomass, purpose grown energy crops, bio-based products and renewable chemicals, Erickson said.

Thune is a strong and consistent advocate for biotechnology in his home state as well, said Joni Johnson, executive director of South Dakota Biotech, the state affiliate for BIO.

See the rest here:
Biotechnology group names Thune its legislator of the year - Watertown Public Opinion

The biotech industry had a rough 12 months. First the beatings came from presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton as she vowed to crush their pricing models. Now President Donald Trump is following up with similar promises.

For a long while, tickers like the iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF) (NASDAQ:IBB) were toxic to investors. The thesis was that healthcare and biotech companies were untouchable with the political cloud looming above them.

Recently, and in spite of the fact that that nothing has changed from the political standpoint, the worrisome headlines became stale and lost their zing. Thats what usually happens. Traders initially over-react to the headline and then after a while, return to trading the fundamentals.

The companies in the IBB have legitimate, viable businesses. This is a classic case of a bad apples who spoil the bunch.

Technically the IBB stock price is in a breakout that I rode higher on Feb. 11 with debit call spreads.

The important price action came when the IBB reclaimed the $280 per share pivotal zone. From here at the $300 per share level, it can once again provide a base from which to mount another leg higher. This area is an important long term pivot level so has the potential to be a solid base once it is cleared.

Click to Enlarge The ongoing IBB measured move has more upside potential, but there is also resistance looming above. Whats important to me as a premium seller is to find areas where price is not going so I can safely sell risk for income.

Now that Wall Street is repricing the IBB where it should be in spite of the headlines, I want to sell downside risk.

Finding the right level can be tricky. Biotech companies are susceptible to big moves on surprise headlines. Even though the IBB risk is spread among its components, they tend to trade in unison. So if one component of the IBB moves on a headline, the rest would follow in sympathy. This makes trading IBB via sold premium as risky as a single momentum headline stock.

The Bullish Trade: Sell the IBB Jan 2018 $255/$250 credit put spread. I collected $1 per contract to open which would be a 25% yield on risk if I win. The 15% price buffer gives this trade an 85% theoretical chance of success.

Usually I like to hedge my bet. In this case I will sell opposite risk so to balance the trade. There is no rush to do so in this uber-bullish markets. So I could delay entry until I see an abatement in the exuberance over biotech stocks.

The Hedge (optional): Sell the IBB Jan 2018 $355/$360 credit call spread. I collect an additional $1 per contract to open.

If I take both sides then I would be in a sold iron condor where I need IBB to stay between $255 and $355 per share. If IBB stays in the range, this trade would yield over 60% on money risked.

I am not required to hold my options trades open through expiration. I can close either at any time for partial gains or losses.

Nicolas Chahine is the managing director of SellSpreads.com. As of this writing, he did not hold a position in any of the aforementioned securities. You can follow him on Twitter at @racernicand stocktwits at@racernic.

Original post:
Study Free Profits From iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF) (IBB) Stock - Investorplace.com

Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) was Reiterated by RBC Capital Mkts to Sector Perform while Lowering the Price Target of the company shares to $ 17 from a previous price target of $48 . RBC Capital Mkts advised their Clients and Investors in a research report released on Mar 2, 2017.

Based on several research reports , Shares were Reiterated by RBC Capital Mkts on Mar 2, 2017 to Sector Perform and Lowered the Price Target to $ 17 from a previous price target of $48 .

Several company insiders have filed Insider transactions , on Jan 24, 2017, Steven Lo (Chief Commercial Officer) sold 2,290 shares at $33.24 per share price. According to the SEC, on Jan 24, 2017, Charles R Eyler (officer ) sold 820 shares at $33.24 per share price. On Jan 24, 2017, Richard Paul Bryce (SR VP, CLINICAL RESEARCH & DEV) sold 2,293 shares at $33.24 per share price, according to the Form-4 filing with the securities and exchange commission.

Puma Biotechnology Inc opened for trading at $36.2 and hit $37.6 on the upside on Monday, eventually ending the session at $37.35, with a gain of 3.18% or 1.15 points. The heightened volatility saw the trading volume jump to 9,22,483 shares. Company has a market cap of $1,375 M.

Puma Biotechnology Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company that focuses on the acquisition development and commercialization of products for the treatment of cancer. The Company focuses on in-licensing drug candidates that are undergoing or have already completed initial clinical testing for the treatment of cancer and then seeks to further develop those drug candidates for commercial use. It licenses the rights to three drug candidates. It is developing PB272 (neratinib (oral)) for the treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) positive breast cancer and patients with non-small cell lung cancer breast cancer and other solid tumors that have a HER2 mutation. It is developing PB272 (neratinib (intravenous)) for the treatment of patients with advanced cancer. PB357 is an orally administered agent that is an irreversible tyrosine kinase inhibitor that blocks signal transduction through the epidermal growth factor receptors HER1 HER2 and HER4.

See more here:
RBC Capital Mkts Released Sector Perform Rating on Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) - Times Money

The UP Genetic Researchers and Agricultural Innovators Society strives to uphold awareness on the ways, means, and science behind agricultural biotechnology to help students and farmers alike

Published 6:59 AM, March 06, 2017

Updated 9:19 AM, March 06, 2017

MANILA, Philippines How can agricultural biotechnology help and serve farmers and students alike?

These students from the University of the Philippines Genetic Researchers and Agricultural Innovators Society or UP GRAINS found a way.

We think its important to promote biotechnology because its one of the most advanced fields of science and we think it is also neglected in the Philippines," founding Vice-President of UP Grains Kohlin Lallaban said.

UP GRAINS, which was formed in 2014 in UP Los Baos, is an academic organization that promotes agricultural biotechnology. The group helps farmers make a living. Its programs allow students from Batangas, Laguna, and Camarines Norte provinces learn about techniques in biotechnology and how they can apply these to their research.

They bring experts and professors from different universities in Laguna and Batangas to communities, teaching farmers how to grow their crops better.

The student organization has touched lives through its programs which include academic tutorials (Chem 40: Basic Organic Chemistry Tutorials), educational discussions (AgriBioTalk Series), inter-high school information drives (Lakbay-Bioteknolohiya Workshops), farmer-oriented extension programs (Ugnayan Series), interactive advocacy campaigns (#EveryButilCounts, Free Demo Shirt Printings), and even a nationwide junior research conference (Project BT).

There was this one time that we did an extension activity in Laguna. We pushed the farmers to establish an irrigation system for their farm. Right now, theyre producing almost 40% more of cavans of rice than they were able to produce before, Lallaban shared.

One of the greatest ironies in the Philippines is that food producers like farmers and fishermen are the most vulnerable to hunger. UP GRAINS wants to change this situation in rural communities. By change, they mean continuous innovation for a better future, according to Lallaban.

"We think that the biggest lesson that our organization learned from our immersions is that there are bigger things than us, there are bigger things that we have to do, there are bigger things that we have to think about and that there is no better time to do that than now." Rappler.com

UP GRAINS is a partner organization of Rappler's civic engagement arm MovePH. For more information on how you can help or be part of UP GRAINS, check out their stories on X. Know more about our other organization partners:

Do you want your organization to be part of MovePH's X Network? Email us at move.ph@rappler.com!

At Rappler, we believe there are many freedoms: to speak, to choose, to love, or just to be. #InspireCourage is our campaign to encourage people to speak up, engage in issues, and continue fighting for the change they want to see. Be part of the conversation

Go here to read the rest:
WATCH: Helping farmers through agricultural biotechnology - Rappler - Rappler

Forbes

Sex, Gene Editing, And Electronic Dance Music: How To Teach Entrepreneurship In Biotechnology Part 1 Forbes I assigned the readings for session 7 via class emails after sessions 4 and 5, disguised as the reading for sessions 5 and 6. First up: Trials, Amy Dockser Marcus' series on how a group of parents of children with Niemann-Pick type C disease tried to ...

See the rest here:
Sex, Gene Editing, And Electronic Dance Music: How To Teach Entrepreneurship In Biotechnology Part 1 - Forbes

LOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / March 2, 2017 / CBDual Biotechnology Corp. ("CBDUAL") announced today the completion of the company's new clinical trial center in Southern California.

CBDual's new facility provides patients with easy access to participate in clinical trials of new medical cannabis medications, therapies, and products. CBDual will develop protocols to improve patient safety and data integrity in clinical research trials in compliance with the HIPAA.

The first scheduled trial will study the medicinal and therapeutic effects of CBD on oral health. The study anticipates between 1,000-2,000 patients and will test the effects of different CBD based mouthwashes and toothpastes.

CBDual has recently entered into a cross licensing agreement with Cavitation Technologies, Inc (OTCQB: CVAT; Berlin: WTC). This agreement covers intellectual property involving the application of technology and patented processes to produce high quality pharmaceutical grade cannabis materials with increased bio-availability and increased shelf life.

Dr. Greg Rubin, CEO of CBDual Biotechnology Corp., previously commented, "The improvement of consumer and medical products require the development of the best quality and utilization of the most innovative technologies in order to achieve ultimate results. The impact of the new clinical research brings us one step closer to introducing our new products to the US markets."

Recent breakthroughs in Cannabinoid (CBD) therapies and orally administered products prompt strong forecast for 2017. The Hemp Business Journal estimated that the CBD market will emerge as a $2.1 billion market in consumer sales by 2020. That represents a 700% increase from 2016. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, a number of studies have shown that CBD is a non-psychoactive cannabinoid and has a wide range of medical benefits, such as anti- inflammatory and anti-oxidant and many other health related benefits.

About CBDual Biotechnology Corp

CBDual Biotechnology is a privately held; US based Biotechnology Company with a proprietary technology for enhanced oral delivery of bioactive cannabinoids. This technology promotes good gums health and overall dental health due to higher effectiveness of the delivery methodology. Company was founded in 2016 and is headquartered in California with its R&D capability in Israel and Ukraine..

Website: http://www.cbdual.com/

About Cavitation Technologies, Inc.

Founded in 2007, the company designs and manufactures state-of-the-art, flow-through, devices and systems as well as develops processing technologies for use in edible oil refining, renewable fuel production, expeditious petroleum upgrading, algae oil extraction, alcoholic beverage enhancement, water treatment and cannabidiol processing. As an add-on to its existing neutralization systems, the company's patented Nano Reactor allows refiners to significantly reduce both processing costs and environmental impact, while also increasing yield.

Website: http://www.ctinanotech.com/ Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ctinanotech Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ctinanotech

Forward Looking Statement

This release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In some cases forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as "may," "should," "potential," "continue," "expects," "anticipates," "intends," "plans," "believes," "estimates," and similar expressions, and include statements regarding the anticipated installation and the timing of the installation, our intent to continue to focus on research and development, marketing and sales of our unique technology, our belief that our company is positioned for accelerated growth and the expected efforts to be made to enhance our shareholder's value. These forward-looking statements are based largely on the Company's expectations and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, certain of which are beyond the Company's control. Actual results could differ materially from these forward looking statements as a result of a variety of factors including, among others, the state of the economy, the competitive environment and our ability to perform the installation as anticipated and other factors described in our most recent Form 10-K and our other filings with the SEC, including subsequent periodic reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K. In light of these risks and uncertainties there can be no assurances that the forward looking statements contained in this press release will in fact transpire or prove to be accurate. The information in this release is provided only as of the date of this release, and we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained in this release on account of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as required by law.

Read More

Cavitation Technologies, Inc.

Contact:

Investor Relations Jessica Steidinger Jessica@ctinanotech.com Phone (818) 718-0905

SOURCE: CBDual Biotechnology Corp.

See more here:
CBDual Biotechnology Corp. Announces the Completion of their ... - Yahoo Finance