You have been saying STFU to people who have put forth valuable insights for years now. I went back and read the article AF wrote regarding Prurisol from a while back:
https://www.thestreet.com/story/13960573/1/bi...flags.html
We hurled stones at him and decried how he was twisting the data. He had many objections to how patient sub groups were evaluated. At the time we said he was just a short and distort guru. In the end, it appears his analysis regarding the Prurisol 2a numbers was more accurate than those of the company in predicting how it would fare in a 2b trial.
Was CTIX too aggressive in locating a favorable subgroup or were we just victims of statistically small numbers? Obviously if we came anywhere near the 35% number touted for the 200mg group Prurisol would not have been axed. Even a 20-25% PASI 75 would have to be worth a $50M sale like the crap Xenoport drug purchased by Dr. Reddy's right? Hell, can we not even get $15M-20M for it to get us out of this cash hole we're in? Maybe there is more value to be extracted from it given more time and analysis - perhaps going back to the drawing board for a mild-moderate 2b? For now it seems not according to the 8K but perhaps some sale of the asset is in store for the future.
This sort of critical miss on extrapolating future success of a drug based on a very small subgroup is what concerns me most about B-OM. If we didn't get BTD, I am guessing it is because the number of patients dosed is too small. My hope is that the percentages we saw are just so good that they overpower the relatively small sample size.
So you're right. We need a STFU emoji.
https://www.thestreet.com/story/13960573/1/bi...flags.html
We hurled stones at him and decried how he was twisting the data. He had many objections to how patient sub groups were evaluated. At the time we said he was just a short and distort guru. In the end, it appears his analysis regarding the Prurisol 2a numbers was more accurate than those of the company in predicting how it would fare in a 2b trial.
Was CTIX too aggressive in locating a favorable subgroup or were we just victims of statistically small numbers? Obviously if we came anywhere near the 35% number touted for the 200mg group Prurisol would not have been axed. Even a 20-25% PASI 75 would have to be worth a $50M sale like the crap Xenoport drug purchased by Dr. Reddy's right? Hell, can we not even get $15M-20M for it to get us out of this cash hole we're in? Maybe there is more value to be extracted from it given more time and analysis - perhaps going back to the drawing board for a mild-moderate 2b? For now it seems not according to the 8K but perhaps some sale of the asset is in store for the future.
This sort of critical miss on extrapolating future success of a drug based on a very small subgroup is what concerns me most about B-OM. If we didn't get BTD, I am guessing it is because the number of patients dosed is too small. My hope is that the percentages we saw are just so good that they overpower the relatively small sample size.
So you're right. We need a STFU emoji.
1
1
