you made the following absurd claim after a drug failed a phase 2 trial.
What makes you think the company didn't have evidence of efficacy before the phase 2 trial? Don't you think they have pre-clinical data to support that? The phase I study is for safety and to often identify dosage and in some cases to assess a degree to efficacy. Phase I trials are usually very small so a drug can give good evidence for efficacy in such a small phase I trial but when a larger trial is conducted it doesn't hold up. I hope this clears things up for you.
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.