Cloaked Protector, My earlier reply to you perhaps didn't call out directly the key points I was trying to make. I will try again.
Here are some PPHM/Bavi situation set up points:
1. Bavi is in a cluster of PPHM sponsored trials and Investigator Sponsored Trials that are structured to show Bavi is outperforming SOC for a wide array of cancers. Cluster means more than one cancer type. More than one drug treatment as Standard of Care and more than one Pharma company involved with supplying the drugs involved with SOC. That means that PPHM is challenging what some might call a "throng" of established Pharma with trial results that might show Pharma their SOC products have become obsolete without being supplemented by the Bavi family platform of drugs, to be determined.
2. Some of these multplie trials give just directional results, some more pronounced results, some very resolute results, but credibility for Bavi being applied for treatment of a multitude of cancers is being delivered under Dr. Garnick's carefuly laid out PPHM trial design plan, nonetheless. For example, an IST for Phase 1 Rectal Adenocarcinoma was announced on July 16. On May 25, Peregrine announced patient enrollment completion for a Randomized Phase 2 Pancreatic Cancer trial. We are awaiting MOS results from an ongoing Non Small Cell Lung Cancer trial. Ocular herpes and Macular degeneration have received some "potential" for treatment analysis under investigation. Breast and liver cancer applications are being investigated. Cotara is strutting its stuff against Glio Blastoma Multiform (brain cancer).
What does this mean if Bavi gets validated as outperforming SOC for treatment of these and other maladies?
3. A single drug platform (the Bavi family) has the ability to upstage various Pharma's favored treatments that are currently delivering SOC in a profitable manner. Maybe Bavi can act alone, but more likely, Bavi can be combined with these other SOC treatments to establish standing as the new SOC. Call that incentive for a Pharma and PPHM to partner or enter agreement for Bavi tech rights.
4. Some of the SOC that have been mated with Bavi in PPHM trials are going off of patent protection. This means that ANY PHARMA THAT PARTNERS TO ACQUIRE BAVI RIGHTS CAN DISPLACE THE COMPETITIVE PHARMA"S SOC TREATMENT AND EFFECTIVELY TAKE OVER WHAT HAS BEEN A TRADITIONAL PROFIT CENTER FOR THE COMPETING PHARMA (emphasis added).
5. There is already more than one major Pharma involved with supplying SOC medicine that is in the process of being demonstrated as enhanced or improved to meet a higher SOC threshold while using Bavi. This means that Pharma competition for Bavi rights is intrinsic to the outcome if PPHM demonstrates Bavi is outperforming the SOC by a significant margin. Remember, Bavi has been shown to be "safe and well tolerated" without exhibiting those nasty side effects listed for the other treatment alternatives.
Now think from the perspective of a large pharma that is enjoying the revenue stream from supplying a standard of care treatment from both DEFENSIVELY and OFFENSIVELY, in the US and outside of the US.
Defensively, the Pharma will likely want to take measures that can preclude Bavi displacing the Pharma's SOC treatment. If going off patent protection, direct means for impairing deployment of Bavi will no longer exist. That means that obstructing Bavi development by impairing the ability for PPHM to raise funds or otherwise laying out road blocks to Bavi development can still be a Pharma defensive tool, but it now appears that PPHM has been able to weather through such measures to a point where Bavi success demonstration is an inevitable outcome of work already done. (Of course, it has been hard on long share holders (can we say Reverse Split and ATM financings that eroded the pps base to preserve PPHM tech rights?)).
With demonstrated Bavi success, a Pharma in a defensive position will not only want to attempt to keep their revenue stream going by bundling their SOC with a Bavi tech rights agreement but the pharma must be concerned that one of their pharma competitors with deep pockets will obtain those exclusive Bavi rights to the extent that their competitor can smother them out of the market by taking hard ball measures to move that lucrative revenue stream flow from the original SOC Pharma pockets towards the Pharma with newly won Bavi rights in their pocket. All it takes is for a resolute, unimpeachable result from trials that validates the Bavi platform and voila!, survival instinct needs to bring Pharma to the Bavi table even if the Pharma doesn't like the PPHM management team's high expectations for a buyout or partnering price.
Offensively, each Pharma that wants to be a player in the realm of oncology treatments for which Bavi is showing improvement over SOC will want to put forward a bid for Bavi tech rights or try to break the PPHM patents by designer drug developing around Bavi or taking their game ball to foreign countries where US technology rights have a history for not being respected (recall China and Cancer Therapeutics Laboratories litigation and the related walk down of the PPHM pps from the post split equivalent of $20 pps?).
I have already gone on too long here again, but my perspective is that if PPHM delivers the NSCLC 2nd line treatment with Bavi showing standout improvement in Median Overall Survival vs. the Standard of Care, both the offensive and defensive motivators for big pharma to acquire Bavi tech rights come into play.
Finally, my original call outs included how each cancer indication that PPHM demonstrates as "showing promise" with Bavi for improved treatment draws in another Pharma or two into a defensive or offensive Bavi negotiations interest base. If there are "n" cancer indications shown to get a Bavi advantage, there should be around "n" Pharma showing interest in Bavi tech rights. If Steve King is saying that there have been a dozen Pharma parties expressing interest in the anti-PS, Bavi family technology, compare that number to how many pharmas might get their ox gored if a competitor Pharma gets exclusive world wide Bavi rights, leaving them "at the altar".
As soon as that unimpeachable result gets delivered that shows Bavi is outperforming SOC for a major SOC while it is directionally showing benefits for a host of other cancer treatments, the primary factors holding back the PPHM pps is investor ignorance combined with PPHM being tight on funds for "going it alone" through Phase 3 trials and ultimate FDA approval. Being tight on funds and the desire to finally release full share holder value is part of the PPHM management team incentive to come into agrement with Pharma. Renewal of stock options issued to the PPHM management team and employees will assure that those doing the Bavi development work can share in the benefits of any appreciable PPHM pps appreciation.
Do I need to mention that PPHM already announced that the control arm of the double blind 2nd line NSCLC study underway was showing Median Overall Survival of six months or less and that the Bavi arms are approaching a year since trial enrollment was complete? Or that PPHM reinforced during their earnings call that MOS results for the Bavi arms in the trial will be released when they are timely for reporting? Perhaps, PPHM management has spelled out what has happened to that group of Pharma that PPHM said has signed confidentiality agreements and have been talking to PPHM about Bavi?
If you were a big Pharma interested offensively or defensively in the Bavi platform and you could still feel the chair is warm after you watched a group of your competitor Pharma leave the negotiation room at PPHM headquarters, what would you say when Steve King offered you coffee to get discussions going?
How about, "Bavi is just a placebo, please pass the cream and sugar", LOL!!
Best wishes and IMO.
KT
