Exhibit 99.1

                                  RISK FACTORS

Because we have a very short operating history, we may not be able to manage our
business successfully or achieve consistent profitability.

      ISI began commercial operations in November 1997. Because of this very
limited operating history, there are no meaningful financial results that you
can use to evaluate the merits of making an investment in our company.
Accordingly, you must make your investment decisions based on our business
prospects. We may not be able to grow our business as planned or ever become a
consistently profitable business. Our business prospects are subject to all the
risks, expenses and uncertainties encountered by any new company. Our limited
operating history makes it difficult to evaluate our proprietary technologies,
as well as the likelihood of regulatory approval, commercial viability, and
market acceptance of our potential products.

We have a history of operating losses; we expect to continue to incur losses and
we may never be profitable.

      As of March 31, 2001, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately
$1,473,000. For the year ended December 31, 2000, we had a net loss of
approximately $926,000. These losses have resulted principally from costs
incurred to support the clinical research relating to our nuclear pharmaceutical
technologies being performed by the medical groups that we manage, from
increases in professional fees associated with our status as a publicly held
entity and costs incurred in the submission of a registration statement to the
Securities and Exchange Commission. We expect that our operating losses will
continue to increase significantly as the research relating to our nuclear
pharmaceutical technologies increases.

      Our ability to achieve future profitability is dependent upon obtaining
regulatory approvals for our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies and
successfully commercializing the technologies alone or with third parties.
However, our operations may not be profitable even if we are able to
commercialize the nuclear pharmaceutical technologies.

We depend on management and license fees from the two medical groups we manage.

      Currently, all of our operating revenues are derived from the management
and license fees we receive from the two medical groups we manage. One of these
groups, Stanley E. Order, M.D., P.C., provided us with approximately 78% of our
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2000 and the quarter ended March 31,
2001. If either of these groups fails or terminates its management/license
agreements with us, we may lose a significant source of operating revenues and
our ability to develop our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies may be delayed or
even curtailed.

Our success or failure will depend on the efforts of the physicians in the
medical groups that we manage, over which we have limited control.

      Our success depends in significant part upon the success of the two
medical research groups that we manage: Stanley E. Order, M.D., P.C., d/b/a
Center for Molecular Medicine, and Mitchell E. Levine, M.D., P.C., d/b/a Center
for Neuro-Oncology. These medical groups are responsible for certain sales,
marketing, technology development and distribution activities that are outside
our direct control. In addition, the success of the medical groups depends in
part on the credentials, protocols, and treatment success rates of the
physicians in the medical groups. The reputations and capabilities of the
physicians in these medical groups may change. If these medical groups do not
use our technologies successfully, we may not be able to sell or license them to
third parties.

<PAGE>

      Similarly, our business operations may be harmed if the medical groups
that we manage terminate their agreements with us. Although the medical groups
have only limited termination rights, we may not be able to maintain our
existing management arrangements with these medical groups. If we do not
maintain these arrangements, we may lose a significant portion of our operating
revenues and our ability to develop our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies
could be impaired.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights, and even if we
can they may not give us a significant competitive advantage.

      Our success depends in part upon our ability to obtain and maintain rights
to our nuclear pharmaceuticals. We rely on our patents, trade secrets and
trademarks to protect our proprietary rights. It is possible that competitors
may infringe our patents or successfully avoid them through design innovation.
The cost of litigation to uphold the validity of our patents and to prevent
infringement could be substantial and the litigation may consume time and other
resources. Some of our competitors may be better able to sustain the costs of
complex patent litigation because they have substantially greater resources.
Moreover, there is a risk that a court would decide that our patents are not
valid and that we do not have the right to stop a competitor from using our
technologies. There is also the risk that, even if the validity of our patents
were upheld, a court would refuse to stop the other party on the ground that its
activities do not infringe our patents. Policing unauthorized use of our
intellectual property is difficult and expensive, and we may be unable to
prevent misappropriation of our proprietary rights.

The medical groups performing clinical trials of our nuclear pharmaceutical
technologies may take longer to complete the clinical trials than we expect, or
they may not be able to complete the clinical trials at all.

      A number of factors may cause significant delays in the clinical trials
being performed on our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies, including scheduling
conflicts with participating clinicians and difficulties in identifying and
enrolling patients who meet eligibility criteria. As a result, the medical
groups performing the clinical trials may not complete the clinical trials of
our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies as expected. We rely on the medical
groups we manage to conduct, supervise and monitor all aspects of the clinical
trials involving our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies. The medical groups we
manage may fail to complete, or experience delays in, the clinical trials.

Our nuclear pharmaceuticals may cause unforeseen harmful side effects, which may
lead to product liability claims.

      The medical groups we manage have not yet completed clinical testing of
our colloidal P32/MAA technology and have not yet commenced clinical testing of
our radioactive cisplatin technology. It is possible that our technologies may
cause unforeseen harmful side effects. For example, bacterial contamination of
the macro-aggregated albumin and colloidal P32 may result in bacterial
infection-like reactions in patients, which could be severe and even fatal.
These products may also cause allergic reactions of varying levels in
susceptible individuals. Allergic reactions could be severe and even fatal. In
the event the colloidal P32 breaks apart into small radioactive particles, it
may go to areas within the body beyond the tumor where it was placed. This could
cause a decrease in blood cell counts that could lead to infection, bleeding,
hospitalization or even death. If our products have any harmful effects, product
liability claims could be brought against us.

      We intend to obtain product liability coverage in the future. However, we
may not be able to obtain product liability insurance coverage at an acceptable
cost, or at all. We may not be able to obtain insurance coverage that will be
adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. Regardless of merit or
eventual outcome and whether or not we are insured, product liability claims may
result in decreased demand for our technologies, injury to our reputation and
loss of revenues.


                                       2
<PAGE>

We may fail to obtain or maintain regulatory approval for our radioactive
cisplatin and colloidal P-32/MAA technologies.

      Our radioactive cisplatin and colloidal P-32/macro-aggregated albumin
technologies are subject to rigorous preclinical and clinical testing and
approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, comparable agencies in other
countries, and state regulatory authorities. The clinical trial and regulatory
approval processes for biopharmaceutical products, i.e., drugs that are either
derived from biologic materials or that target tumors or other tissues,
typically last several years and involve significant expenditures. Even after
receipt of regulatory approval for a product or technique, we remain subject to
periodic review from government regulatory bodies. Any safety concerns relating
to our technologies may result in withdrawal of the technologies from the market
or restrictions on their future use. If we are unable to obtain and maintain
regulatory approval for our technologies we will not be able to sell them.

            The medical groups we manage have enrolled over 90 patients in three
separate studies of colloidal P32/MAA. One study, a Phase II study involving
pancreatic cancer that has not previously been treated using other
methodologies, is nearing completion. We expect that a second Phase II study,
involving pancreatic cancer that has previously been treated using other
methodologies, will be completed in approximately two years. We expect that the
third study, a Phase I study involving brain cancer, will be completed in
approximately six months. We expect that Phase II studies in brain cancer, which
will follow the Phase I study, will take an additional three to four years. The
researchers in the medical groups we manage are continuing to accrue and treat
patients in the Phase II study of pancreatic cancer that has not previously been
treated with other methodologies and are analyzing the data gathered in the
study. Once patient accrual and treatment and data analysis are complete, we
intend to approach the FDA regarding the adequacy of this data to support
approval of the product for this indication. We intend to approach the FDA
regarding the adequacy of the data from the other Phase II studies once the
studies and the analysis of the data gathered in the studies have been
completed. It is possible that the FDA may require that a Phase III study be
conducted for one or more of these indications. Because we do not know how much
additional research will be required in order to support approval of this
technology for each of these indications, we cannot be certain how long it will
take or how much additional costs we will incur before we can market this
technology for these indications.

      We will need data from a minimum of three clinical studies of our
radioactive cisplatin technology in order to demonstrate to the FDA that this
technology is safe and effective. We expect that the initial study will be a 15
patient Phase I safety study that will last up to two years. The medical groups
we manage are presently preparing this Phase I study and we expect that it will
commence in the fourth quarter of 2001. The timing of the commencement of this
study will depend primarily on how quickly the medical groups can attract
patients for the study. We expect that the medical groups we manage will need to
conduct two Phase II studies, involving perhaps 60 patients each, to determine
the proper dose, effectiveness, and safety of the product. We expect that the
Phase II studies, which may last several years, will involve various solid tumor
cancers. It is possible that a Phase III study may be necessary depending on the
results of the Phase II studies. Because we do not know how much research will
be required in order to support approval of this technology, we cannot be
certain how long it will take or how much additional costs we will incur before
we can market this technology for these indications.

      Whether or not we have obtained FDA approval for one of our technologies,
we may have to obtain approval of the technology by comparable regulatory
authorities in foreign countries before we can begin marketing the technology in
those countries. In general each country has its own procedures and
requirements, many of which are time consuming and expensive. There can be
substantial delays in obtaining required approvals from foreign regulatory
authorities after the relevant applications are filed.


                                       3
<PAGE>

The medical groups we manage may be liable for repayment of charges for
colloidal P32/MAA administered in the clinical studies.

      In November 2000, the FDA asked Dr. Stanley Order to submit an
Investigational New Drug Application for colloidal P32/MAA. The FDA asked Dr.
Order, rather than ISI, to file the IND because Dr. Order was the principal
researcher for the clinical studies. For that reason, and because the FDA's
request was directed to Dr. Order, we asked Dr. Order to file the IND. Dr.
Order, through the Center for Molecular Medicine, filed the IND in November
2000. On December 21, 2000, the FDA advised Dr. Order and the Center for
Molecular Medicine that, because of the higher dosages and novel ways in which
the drug was administered in the studies, the colloidal P32/MAA as administered
in the studies was a new drug within the meaning of the FDA's regulations and
asked Dr. Order and the Center for Molecular Medicine to submit a request for
permission to charge for the drug. The FDA's regulations require persons
conducting studies of new drugs that are the subject of an IND to obtain the
FDA's permission before charging participants in the studies for the costs of
the drug administered to them. Dr. Order and the Center for Molecular Medicine
have submitted a request for permission to charge patients for the colloidal
P32/MAA administered in the studies. Until such permission is obtained, however,
the medical groups we manage are not charging patients for the colloidal P32/MAA
administered to them. Prior to November 2000, the medical groups charged
patients in the clinical studies an aggregate of approximately $300,000 for
colloidal P32/MAA administered in the studies. If patients, or their insurance
providers, who paid for the colloidal P32/MAA administered in the studies
successfully claim that the medical groups were not entitled to charge for the
colloidal P32/MAA administered to the patients, the medical groups could be
liable to repay the amounts charged. If the medical groups are required to repay
these charges the medical groups may have difficulty paying us the fees they owe
us.

We may be required to incur significant costs to comply with environmental,
health and safety regulations.

      Many of the research, development and clinical processes of our managed
medical groups involve the controlled use of small amounts of hazardous and
radioactive materials. As a result, the medical groups are subject to foreign,
federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and policies governing the
use, generation, manufacture, storage, air emission, effluent discharge,
handling and disposal of certain materials and wastes in our research and
development activities and our manufacturing of clinical trial materials.
Although we believe that the safety procedures followed by our medical groups
for handling and disposing of such materials comply with the standards
prescribed by such laws and regulations, we may be required to incur significant
costs to help our managed medical groups comply with environmental and health
and safety regulations in the future. In addition, the risk of accidental
contamination or injury from hazardous and radioactive materials cannot be
completely eliminated. The potential liability for damages stemming from
accidents involving these materials may exceed our insurance coverage or
available resources or the insurance coverage or available resources of one or
more of our managed medical groups.

If our proprietary technologies fail to achieve market acceptance our business
operations will be harmed.

      Our success and competitive position depends upon market acceptance of our
cancer treatment technologies. Side effects, especially unanticipated ones, or
unfavorable publicity surrounding our cancer treatment technologies, may harm
our ability to market our technologies. We may not be able to achieve product
and service commercialization, and physicians, patients and third-party payers
may not accept our technologies.

Our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies could become obsolete.

      We operate in an industry characterized by extensive research efforts,
rapidly evolving technology and intense competition from numerous organizations,
including pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology firms, academic institutions
and others. New developments are expected to continue rapidly in both industry
and


                                       4
<PAGE>

academia. Research and discoveries by others may render our cancer treatment
technologies obsolete, uneconomical or otherwise unmarketable.

If health insurers and other third parties refuse to reimburse patients for the
costs of our products, doctors may be unwilling to use the products, and we may
be unable to sell them.

      Our ability to commercialize our nuclear pharmaceutical technologies
successfully will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for their
use will be available from government health administration authorities, private
health insurers and other organizations. Significant uncertainty exists as to
the reimbursement status of newly approved health care technologies. Doctors and
patients may not want to use any technology we may market if they are not able
to obtain reimbursement for their expenses.

We depend on a limited number of suppliers of the raw materials for our nuclear
pharmaceuticals, and if we are unable to obtain the raw materials we will not be
able to manufacture and sell our products.

      We currently depend on a limited number of qualified suppliers of the raw
materials for our nuclear pharmaceuticals. We currently procure colloidal
P-32/MAA exclusively from one supplier, Mallinckrodt, Inc. Similarly, our
radioactive cisplatin is manufactured exclusively for us by one company, Iso-Tex
Diagnostics, Inc. There are, in general, relatively few companies with the
ability to manufacture these two nuclear pharmaceuticals. Although we are aware
of other companies that could produce both products for us if needed, including
MDS Nordion and Radiopharmacy, Inc., we would probably incur significant delay
and additional costs if we switched suppliers.

We depend on the continued assistance of Dr. Stanley E. Order to develop our
radioactive cisplatin technology.

      Because our radioactive cisplatin technology is still in an early stage of
development, we depend in part on the efforts of Dr. Stanley E. Order, who
invented the technology, to help develop it. We have $4,000,000 of key person
life insurance covering Dr. Order. Through his medical group, Dr. Stanley E.
Order, M.D., P.C., d/b/a Center for Molecular Medicine, Dr. Order is conducting
the clinical research needed to support the application for FDA approval of this
technology. If Dr. Order were no longer available or able to assist us with the
development of radioactive cisplatin, we might not be able to continue to
develop this technology. If we could not continue to develop radioactive
cisplatin it would not have a significant effect on our revenues from our
medical group management operations. However, it would reduce significantly the
revenues that we might earn in the future from our nuclear pharmaceutical
technologies.

We could become subject to sanctions if we are found to be violating New York
law prohibiting the corporate practice of medicine.

      New York State law provides that only natural persons may practice
medicine in New York State. This law has been interpreted by the courts and
administrative agencies of New York to prohibit corporations from arranging for
medical treatment of patients. We believe that the administrative and support
services we provide to the medical groups we manage do not constitute the
corporate practice of medicine. However, if we were found to be in violation of
this law we could be required to cease providing services to the managed medical
groups and our agreements with the groups might have to be modified or
terminated. If this were to occur we would no longer receive some or all of the
fees the medical groups currently pay us. If we were to lose this income, we
might not be able to obtain the clinical research necessary to support our
applications for FDA approval of our nuclear pharmaceuticals.


                                       5
<PAGE>

We may be liable to pay a third party a substantial portion of any revenues we
earn from marketing our colloidal P32/MAA technology.

      In May 2001, we were advised by Dr. Stanley E. Order that Associates in
Radiation Oncology, P.A., had contacted him by letter dated April 30, 2001, and
claimed that it was entitled to 50% of all royalties or fees obtained by Dr.
Order from one of the patents he assigned to us relating to our colloidal
P32/MAA technology. At present, we are not aware that any litigation has been
commenced in this matter. We believe that Associates in Radiation Oncology's
claim is without merit. However, if Associates in Radiation Oncology were to
bring a successful claim against us, we could be required to pay Associates in
Radiation Oncology significant royalties from any revenues we earn from
marketing our colloidal P32/MAA technology, and if Associates in Radiation
Oncology were to bring a successful claim against Dr. Order, it could impair the
ability of Stanley E. Order, M.D., P.C., d/b/a Center for Molecular Medicine, to
pay us fees it owes us.

Trading in our common stock on the OTC Bulletin Board may be limited.

      Our common stock is traded on the OTC Bulletin Board. The OTC Bulletin
Board is not an exchange and, because trading of securities on the OTC Bulletin
Board is often more sporadic than the trading of securities listed on an
exchange or Nasdaq, you may have difficulty selling your securities.

Our common stock is subject to penny stock regulation.

      Our common stock is subject to regulations of the Securities and Exchange
Commission relating to the market for penny stocks. These regulations generally
require that a disclosure schedule explaining the penny stock market and the
risks associated with the penny stock market be delivered to purchasers of penny
stocks and impose various sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell
penny stocks to persons other than established customers and accredited
investors. The regulations applicable to penny stocks may severely limit the
market liquidity for our securities and could reduce your ability to sell your
securities in the market.


                                       6