Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
the inflammatory problems are obviously real and important- it is just a question of whether B will be given to enough of them to have a real sample size for analysis. Stroke and MI and DVT/PE and renal disease are important, but how many will the trial include? Maybe that will in fact be a primary focus in enrollment- we do not know yet. No hint of any measure for brain fog- I do not know if it correlates at all with viral load.
Of course it remains very unlikely that young football players(or the Red Sox pitcher, a prominent local example in Boston) with myocarditis will get B this go round. But maybe one day they will.
I disagree about the antibiotic. Again: those with any hint of bacterial disease will get standard antibiotic coverage, plus B?. How many will then get C diff? will we find out with this sample size? I doubt it.
Agreed about early intervention. Still recommending B v C ED to Leo-
you are right to fret . Entirely possible this trial fails and a B v C ED trial in discharged COVID patients woulda worked. Then where will we be?
3 in 1? Hmmm. No one has any clue if B will help or not or what the correct dosing is for this anti inflammatory effect. Also, as you note- it is a smaller group that has these complications. Most have respiratory problems as the cause of decline and death.
Will B be given to enough of those will inflammatory problems to achieve any significant results? it is not going to be easy, unless they choose out those patients specifically. They have said nothing about that as a strategy.
The second bit- the antibiotic effect. Bogus, here, in my view. No MD will not give the usual standard antibiotics if there is a belief that the patient has a bacterial component to his or her illness. And giving people with a viral illness an antibiotic takes away that choice for the treatment team- they will not like that. We do not know how that will impact patient care yet, but the chances that it will help- in this trial- are likely zero. (Again: those with likely bacterial illness as a complication will be treated with standard antibiotics) But it may hurt, we will have to see
It will be amazing if the trial succeeds, but there is a very good chance of failure. The antiviral effect has been most noted for its use in stopping spread of virus(their words, not mine), and all of these patients will have very widespread virus.
Just when the world needs better COVID treatments you can be sure that IP will NOT give us quick data and a speedy trial. It is bound to drag out...c'mon IP surprise us for a change
So how ugly will IP make it? Slow recruitment and slow to begin dosing? Can they actually really pull off a speedy trial? I doubt it, and prob everyone else here doubts it too. It will be interesting to see just how slow they are in terms of providing any results for shareholders and for the world to see.
You can bet if the results are not great then Leo will stall and delay and release nonsense bogus findings- that is just his style.
Just when things should be quick and smooth you can be certain it will not turn out that way
I suppose you mean it works in a lab for C. And in patients with cellulitis.
Just not for patients with COVID, not yet anyway.
Gee, does that matter? Doesn't the lab data mean it'll work in people?
Um, let's see, why is the company worth less than a quarter....
wow: overrun with total nonsense and irrational exuberance. Sad.
It's all there? As if. Buyer beware. How about perspective? How about the CEO's long history of failing to inform shareholders in a timely fashion? or of lying with statistics? He has a history of totally bogus PRs that exaggerate and mislead(P2b data, B OM subsets) You need to keep reading about the company before a buy.
Sure, if B beats C it'll be a great investment. What about if it fails? Its big claim to fame - per lab data, per Bakovic paper, per Leo- is decreasing spread of the virus and the trial will be on those who already have widespread disease.
But any thinking person can figure out that the company is worth less than a quarter for a lot of good reasons.
plus dexamethasone for very many, clouding the anti inflammatory bit
B gets in the ring with C!
But: What will the B dose be? And dosing intervals? Single dose for cellulitis to suffice for COVID 19? Different combos tried starting next week? Pretty nervewracking really. I guess we start with the fact that the SI is high and that previous B serum levels, safe in patients in the cellulitis trial, were adequate to show a benefit in the lab for COVID 19.
But what about in actual patients? Of course this is a virus and not bacteria. How to extrapolate? How to have confidence? Daily lower dosing? q 48 hours or q 72 or weekly X 3?
And what is the right dose and dosing schedule for anti-inflammatory effect? No one has a clue, obviously
Hang onto your hats and cross your fingers this will take a miracle but we are finally at a point where B gets in the ring with C. We really have to have they chose the right patient population here, since that alone could determine the outcome. As I have said, I have written to Leo several times about B v C ED to try to treat people BEFORE they are so ill, before their lungs are filled with and damaged by virus.
The trial will be short and if there is a big impact they should know fairly soon. Is 60 enough each group? To demonstrate a difference of their endpoints? I hope they have their epidemiology p's and q's squared away- we have all seen the sad numbers dwindle to very few in a trial like B OM, where they had not very large samples. And what about the early Prurisol trials? Too small to say much and so we ended up paying for the large flop of a later phase.
Please let IP not repeat such ugly errors this time around.
the question is why? Why not wait to see if trial succeeds? yes , the prices would be higher, obv, but at least you do not have then a very good chance of losing all your money
where will the trial be Leo? Too funny. Did we ever find out where the B UC enema trial was?
As an anybody I am excited that B has a shot. As an MD I will be excited if it works and I get order it in my ED in March or April
Fascinating- almost NO trial details. Like you know- where is it? Who will be the patients?
Hope this does not portend the future of trial details- all hidden away and buried if B does not do well. Why hide the details now? Why?
Will IP finally get it right with trial start? Good to see the various measures- viral load, etc. They should know helpful info soon, since a lot of the sickest patients progress quickly in their illness.
Silly to continue to mix talk of vaccines versus talk of treatment, since they are very different things. I get it: if the vaccines fail vs the variants, B may still help if you get the variant. But that will have to wait for now.
Still no real details, and why not? How are patients selected? Where is the trial? High flow oxygen patients to start? On vents? Selection of those with inflammatory complications preferentially? All or most already getting Dexamethasone and Remdesivir?
So much unsaid. Why?
Q4 - over and gone. Month of January- toady was the last chance. Shareholders deserve an explanation.
all they have said is 120 inpatients moderate to severe illness, not where or when yet, no other important details. Why the delay? Are they changing the trial?
Shareholders deserve an update- demand one from IP as January vanishes....
April 6 2020official company PR: IP will explore a trial, lots of interest.
How sad to be here today with nothing, as January ends.
Hey Leo- don't make promises you cannot keep...isn't that obvious?
Write Leo now: promises, promises! Fun for a musical, death to shareholders. What is happening with the trial? How about an update? Instead of false promises?
This is so sad.
Momentum squandered, and lost.
As thousands die.
Talking up a trial since April 6 2020 and this is where we are?
Um newbies and all others beware- this is complete and utter nonsense.
Most important, ask: why is this unsupported bogus assertion made?
I am ashamed to even read it.
maybe get it right the third time- announcing trial start? how about start it and then announce it?
Time passes
leo has killed all and any momentum from the summer
pathetic
Despite all that-Share price will be flat except a brief bump at the start. Leo long ago lost the momentum, long long ago
Oh yeah- and all that matters is success.
Will trial failure be the end of IP?
Shoulda been B: Lilly drug decreases hospitalizations.
That shoulda been IP trial
"Likely" trial success = big lie, for some reason repeated here.
Start the trial pls Leo
Better yet change the trial to B v C ED
It is a beautiful gently snow evening in Boston now, and this no doubt includes your IP company HQ in Wakefield. The lovely layer of white covers a multitude of sins including those of IP and Leo with their failed announcements of trial dates- just a few of the recent B v C big misses.
But no matter. We will dwell instead on hopes for a start for B v C.
C'mon Leo get a move on.
Please
It is getting awkward as the month ends and the trial does not start and we are not informed.
cases and hospitalizations now declining - a bit-in Mass. You can feel it, you can feel the difference over a series of shifts- less patients positive after so many coming in very sick. For my ED this is over the last several days.
Trial start q4? No.
Trial start January? um, not looking so good at this moment
let's get B in the game. Is the company reconsidering the trial and thinking of something else?
B v C ED fine by me
the grants- another IP and Leo myth. It may help with so many other viruses and IP applied for a grant for such study. No a word since.
Just the retreat- B may help with other coronaviruses, and there will be more research on this. Any day now, then....
It is way way more than that. Each day lost means a new standard of treatment may emerge and may change the way the trial is run. Every new drug will change the impact that B could have and its place in the arsenal.
Could dexamethasone improve upon the anti inflammatory effect of B? Probably this will never be known since that trial cannot be done at this time. Dexamethasone has already established itself as a standard, so we are stuck trying to improve on that.
It is impossible to know what opportunities have been and will be lost with every lost day.
The long slow summer for B research may have doomed IP already- we do not know yet.
But the failure to start the trial in Sept or Oct and have data for months already has been a disaster for shareholders and for patients alike if the drug proves beneficial.
Earlier data woulda been so much better but IP cannot afford to lose the time it keeps losing.
Report out in Sept- self imposed bogus deadline
Trial start q4- self imposed bogus deadline.
January start appears it may join this queue.
Unfortunately, if it works, for everybody
start date announced today? How about some trial details too please. Or will IP miss another self-imposed deadline
B v C ED- will we ever see such a trial???
It will be interesting- to say the least -to see it play out. I will be very interested to see what severity of illness patients are- ICU, non ICU, vent non vent, high flow O2- how high?? Can B help patients beyond the benefit of dexamethasone, for the anti inflammatory component?
Nerve wracking really.
What if it were helpful given 5-7 days earlier in the ED- before some of those patients return? We may never know the answer. I still wish that was the trial about to start: B v C ED
Money for nothing- how nice for those so confident that B beats C in this trial. Isn't life grand?
Did someone say Prurisol? What? what???
Hmm- tests/trials have very diff prob of success.
Leo has pattern of misinforming and not owning to up failure- delays have often been part of ugly outcomes and bad news here, therefore reason for worry whenever the timetable does way off
I am that very same, totally wrong about that, individual. The data was way too long in coming back and I thought the delay was beginning to feel a lot like Prurisol...
so yes, dead wrong, and I expect to be wrong some of the time. You know, to err is human, that sort of thing.
So say we all.
It falls upon someone to counter the exuberant optimists, especially those who suggest "high likelihood of success " of the trial. For some odd reason I feel compelled to say something when I read total nonsense.
I cannot remember the timing of advice of sell at 8 cents. I would not have said that after all the positive B v C lab data.
I am pretty sure that everyone makes mistakes, no matter what. At least I think they do.
You know, like all the people who guaranteed the trial start in q4.
The right time was 3-4 months ago What's a mother to do? Puny company with no money to push the science over the summer and partnership talk went nowhere.
So we wait and pray.
But buying now is nuts, unless you are a flipper awaiting trial start.
Will the trial start in Jan after all? Or just another failed timeline in the B v C saga-
Dream on folks- wait for trial data no reason to buy now. Trial start will lead to a bump- so I guess buy if you just plan to flip the shares in a day
The blip from beginning the trial will fade, certainly, in short order as we wait for real proof of efficacy
it will not be an easy trial, hospitalized ill inpatients, B v C
Ha! Never met Sonis. Their advisers are experts. I just see emergency patients. If trial succeeds would be happy to see an ED trial- I have written to Leo about this twice already, no response. he used to respond, but not recently
Ha! Never met Sonis. Their advisers are experts. I just see emergency patients. If trial succeeds would be happy to see an ED trial- I have written to Leo about this twice already, no response
0843 today 90.9WBUR(Boston NPR) on the way to work today: Wakefield based IP announced FDA fast track for its drug B in a trial vs C
All of 10 seconds but there it was on the local news
if the trial fails can they still pursue oral B UC? That is a big question.