(Total Views: 632)
Posted On: 09/07/2022 7:19:44 AM
Post# of 153898
MGK_2,
You are probably right, the lift the Clinical Hold is a must and should be our priority, I consider this a given objective.
NASH is a huge indication, clinically and financially no drugs approved for this condition with number of patients being very large: the prevalence of NASH ranges from 6% to 35% worldwide (with a median of 20% 12, in America 10% - 20% with NAFLD and 2%- 5% with NASH.)
The problem with this is that clinical trials are normally lengthy, my preference would be to partner with a BP with experience in this arena.
The Oncology indication, by the contrary, can go through clinical trials much quicker with the potential of returns as large, if not more, than those of NASH.
One way or another: how many companies have this potential ?? NASH or mTNBC-Oncology (apart from the many others) ???
You are probably right, the lift the Clinical Hold is a must and should be our priority, I consider this a given objective.
NASH is a huge indication, clinically and financially no drugs approved for this condition with number of patients being very large: the prevalence of NASH ranges from 6% to 35% worldwide (with a median of 20% 12, in America 10% - 20% with NAFLD and 2%- 5% with NASH.)
The problem with this is that clinical trials are normally lengthy, my preference would be to partner with a BP with experience in this arena.
The Oncology indication, by the contrary, can go through clinical trials much quicker with the potential of returns as large, if not more, than those of NASH.
One way or another: how many companies have this potential ?? NASH or mTNBC-Oncology (apart from the many others) ???
(4)
(0)
