Regarding the dialogue on the probabilities of successfully being able to create a marketable drug, I'd suggest reading this report published by CNN last year, which mentions Anavex dead-on. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/30/health/alzheimers-treatment-precision-medicine-immunotherapy/index.html
Harold Hampel had plenty to say about the small sample size of our 32 patients in our Alzheimer's trial. Though only 32 Alzheimer's patients participated in the study, Hampel feels confident of the results. "Genetic patient data is more precise, and therefore not many patients are required. Examples are genetic studies in oncology, where even smaller studies are performed," "Alzheimer's disease is a complex disease," he said. "The newest weapon in the fight against Alzheimer's disease might be your own body."
The report mentions "Lundbeck, a global pharmaceutical company focused on psychiatric and neurological disorders, also subscribes to this philosophy as it works to develop an immunotherapy for Alzheimer's patients."
So Hampel feels pretty confident in the power
of the "small" 32 patient, uncoltrolled, unblinded trial to predict Anavex's potential success as the "newest weapon in the fight against Alzheimer's disease" which "might be your own body."
Hampel seems to have overcome the math problem of not having a controlled, double blind study to support the claims.
I don't remember seeing this CNN article before. Pretty darn awesome if you ask me.
How does Eisai not make a move on Anavex, now that they grabbed Hampel?
Lundbeck is on our Schizophrenia Consortium, and we share common ground on our approach to treating the disease. How do they not make a move?
So many possibilities...