| 
           CONTINGENCIES 
         | 
        6 Months Ended | 
|---|---|
| 
           Jun. 30, 2013 
         | 
      |
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |
| Legal Matters and Contingencies [Text Block] |                  7.  CONTINGENCIES
       Litigation
       The Company is party to the following legal matter.       BAM Dispute
       From its inception through 2010, Novelos was primarily engaged in  the development of certain oxidized glutathione-based compounds for  application as therapies for disease, particularly cancer. These  compounds were originally developed in Russia and in June 2000,  Novelos acquired commercial rights from the Russian company  (“ZAO BAM”) which owned the compounds and related  Russian patents. In April 2005, Novelos acquired worldwide rights  to the compounds (except for the Russian Federation) in connection  with undertaking extensive development activities in an attempt to  secure US Food and Drug Administration approval of the compounds as  therapies. These development activities culminated in early 2010 in  an unsuccessful Phase 3 clinical trial of an oxidized glutathione  compound (NOV-002) as a therapy for non-small cell lung cancer.  After the disclosure of the negative outcome of the Phase 3  clinical trial in 2010, ZAO BAM claimed that Novelos modified the  chemical composition of NOV-002 without prior notice to or approval  from ZAO BAM, constituting a material breach of the June 2000  technology and assignment agreement. In September 2010, Novelos  filed a complaint in Massachusetts Superior Court seeking a  declaratory judgment by the court that the June 2000 agreement has  been entirely superseded by the April 2005 agreement and that the  obligations of the June 2000 agreement have been performed and  fully satisfied. ZAO BAM answered the complaint and alleged  counterclaims. In August 2011, Novelos filed a motion for judgment  on the pleadings as to the declaratory judgment count and all  counts of ZAO BAM’s amended counterclaims. On October 17,  2011, the court ruled in favor of Novelos on each of the  declaratory judgment claims and dismissed all counts of ZAO  BAM’s counterclaim. Judgment in favor of Novelos was entered  on October 20, 2011. On November 14, 2011 ZAO BAM filed a notice of  appeal.       We do not anticipate that this litigation matter will have a  material adverse effect on the Company’s future financial  position, results of operations or cash flows.    |