Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[kfcyahoo]

KarinCA,

I hope you're right. I'm only questioning why the need to change if it's working so well? Get what's working to the finish line and, at the same time, pursue possible better formulations(if they can afford it) rather than lose more time(which they can't afford).

Perhaps they are getting close to a partnership deal, who knows. You'd think they could provide an update on the cda interest. Now more than 20, less than 20, at least one or two?

I agree with you about B, but frustratingly admit that I have not ruled out P(not because of nerby's post https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=135024214, nor George's incessant(won't bother with an example-one need not look far), but the company's own statement after the ph 2a in the 5/24/16 pr stating "
Included below is a sampling of responses that were authorized to be published:

“Well designed study, patients were pleased, minimal to no side effects."
“Good tolerability was shown with very few AEs reported. Good compliance and good patient satisfaction.”
“Overall impression of the study is very positive, as well as the patients’ satisfaction.”
When asked, “Why would you choose Prurisol (should it be approved) over another oral compound for psoriasis?” and “Why would you choose Prurisol over an injectable biologic?” responses included:
“Because [Prurisol] does not cause any severe side effects. Patients dislike needles and injections because they cause pain and discomfort."
“Patients overall prefer oral medications over injectable medication. Our experience with injectable studies for other indications has been that many subjects do not like taking them and those studies tend to be difficult compared to oral medications to recruit subjects.”
“Because of [Prurisol’s] low side effect profile.”
“Patients prefer oral treatments.”

http://www.ipharminc.com/press-release/2016/11/12/cellceutix-phase-2-trial-of-prurisol-for-mild-to-moderate-psoriasis-meets-primary-endpoint