The FDA has been playing a rough game of "Whack-A-Mole" lately, smacking down would-be drugs in the fields of obesity, diabetes and psychiatry, and hitting the stocks of companies like VIVUS (Nasdaq:VVUS), Arena Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq:ARNA) and Alexza (Nasdaq:ALXA). With a very aggressive pre-panel meeting review, investors are now extremely nervous that the agency is about to do the same to MELA Sciences (Nasdaq:MELA) and MelaFind, the company's would-be testing device for melanoma (a very serious type of skin cancer).

9 Simple Investing Ratios You Need To Know

A Consummate Binary Event
For investors who are not familiar with the term "binary event", the FDA's ultimate decision on MelaFind is a very good working definition. While large medical device companies like Stryker (NYSE:SYK) or Medtronic (NYSE:MDT) need FDA cooperation to thrive, it is more of a matter of survival for MELA Sciences.

If the agency grants approval, the company will be able to enter a large field with no other comparable competitive device option. If the agency refuses to allow MELA to market this device, the company has nothing else in its bag and will effectively be a zombie company. In other words, the stock will go up a lot if the FDA approves MelaFind, or down a lot if MelaFind is rejected. Not surprisingly, then, there has been a huge amount of stock shorting interest and option activity going into Thursday's panel meeting.

The Story So Far
The path to this FDA panel meeting has not been a smooth one. The FDA originally issued a non-approvable letter to the company back in March. After this letter, the company requested (and was granted) a panel meeting to present and discuss the data supporting this device.

Now, as part of the normal pre-meeting procedures, the FDA has posted its review of the device and it is not encouraging. It is not unusual for the FDA to play the role of devil's advocate in these reviews (in fact, it is really part of their job), but the review on MelaFind was unusually harsh. As part of the review, the FDA commented that the benefits of the device were unproven and that it had the potential to actually cause harm. Moreover, the FDA suggested that the company should do further studies to prove the efficacy and utility of the device. (For related reading, check out FDA Makes Intermune Sick.)

As that comment suggests, the data is what matters here. Unfortunately, the data is not exactly clear. Clinical studies of MelaFind have shown 98% sensitivity, and that is not too bad (though it does suggest that the device will miss about two of every 100 potentially cancerous lesions it scans). It is also worth noting that all lesions examined in the study were initially flagged as potentially cancerous, so bears have argued that the device already had a "positive bias" going for it. Moreover, trial data has shown a specificity of 9-10% and that could be problematic as well.

While the company has talked about MelaFind as a device that could increase the diagnostic confidence of dermatologists and lead to lower biopsy rates, that sort of specificity could actually lead to more biopsies. More biopsies are not necessarily a horrible thing (they are rarely painful or disfiguring and melanoma is not a disease to be trifled with), but docs could simply do more biopsies without the machine. Moreover, there was a 7% failure rate in one trial, meaning that 7% of the scans did not work for some reason. While that sounds more like a commercial issue than a regulatory problem, it is nevertheless more ammunition for a safety-obsessed FDA. (For related reading, see A Checklist For Successful Medical Technology Investment.)

The Bottom Line
It is difficult to recall the last medical device approval process that garnered so much controversy and attention, and this whole process has been strange. Here a company chose to raise money before a panel meeting (although there is an argument to be made that companies cannot always pick and choose the "when"), and the company has been rather aggressive in its rebuttals of the FDA's concerns. While that may seem like a normal human reaction for people who are committed to this device, the FDA can always punch back harder than any one company, so it may not be the best tactic. (For related reading, see FDA To Obesity Drugs: Drop Dead.)

For investors, there is almost nothing left to do but take a position (or step to the sideline) and wait for the FDA's verdict. Given the extreme conservatism of the FDA recently, it is hard to have confidence that the panel will be supportive of this device and that the FDA will grant approval. Nevertheless, the company still has a fighting chance and the large potential commercial opportunity of this device will no doubt have many investors hanging on to their shares and hoping for the best both during the panel and in the FDA's ultimate response.

Use the Investopedia Stock Simulator to trade the stocks mentioned in this stock analysis, risk free!

Related Articles
  1. Options & Futures

    Cyclical Versus Non-Cyclical Stocks

    Investing during an economic downturn simply means changing your focus. Discover the benefits of defensive stocks.
  2. Markets

    PEG Ratio Nails Down Value Stocks

    Learn how this simple calculation can help you determine a stock's earnings potential.
  3. Investing Basics

    How to Deduct Your Stock Losses

    Held onto a stock for too long? Selling at a loss is never ideal, but it is possible to minimize the damage. Here's how.
  4. Investing

    What’s the Difference Between Duration & Maturity?

    We look at the meaning of two terms that often get confused, duration and maturity, to set the record straight.
  5. Economics

    Is Wall Street Living in Denial?

    Will remaining calm and staying long present significant risks to your investment health?
  6. Stock Analysis

    When Will Dick's Sporting Goods Bounce Back? (DKS)

    Is DKS a bargain here?
  7. Investing News

    How AT&T Evolved into a Mobile Phone Giant

    A third of Americans use an AT&T mobile phone. How did it evolve from a state-sponsored monopoly, though antitrust and a technological revolution?
  8. Stock Analysis

    Home Depot: Can its Shares Continue Climbing?

    Home Depot has outperformed the market by a wide margin in the last 12 months. Is this sustainable?
  9. Stock Analysis

    Yelp: Can it Regain its Losses in 2016? (YELP)

    Yelp investors have had reason to be happy recently. Will the good spirits last?
  10. Stock Analysis

    Is Walmart's Rally Sustainable? (WMT)

    Walmart is enjoying a short-term rally. Is it sustainable? Is Amazon still a better bet?
  1. What does low working capital say about a company's financial prospects?

    When a company has low working capital, it can mean one of two things. In most cases, low working capital means the business ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. Do nonprofit organizations have working capital?

    Nonprofit organizations continuously face debate over how much money they bring in that is kept in reserve. These financial ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. Can a company's working capital turnover ratio be negative?

    A company's working capital turnover ratio can be negative when a company's current liabilities exceed its current assets. ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. Does working capital measure liquidity?

    Working capital is a commonly used metric, not only for a company’s liquidity but also for its operational efficiency and ... Read Full Answer >>
  5. How do I read and analyze an income statement?

    The income statement, also known as the profit and loss (P&L) statement, is the financial statement that depicts the ... Read Full Answer >>
  6. Can working capital be too high?

    A company's working capital ratio can be too high in the sense that an excessively high ratio is generally considered an ... Read Full Answer >>

You May Also Like

Trading Center