Gfp - perhaps that's the major part of the rationale behind the in-licensing, i.e. if the FDA kills CX-717 then COR will obviously have to raise cash soon thereafter.
And with CX-717 dead and needing to raise cash, COR would no longer have a drug in Phase II.
With an in-licensed drug secured they would.
This actually makes a lot of sense to me now.
I've always understood the general "insurance" angle of having a non-Ampakine program to fall back on and to cover the time gap after Cortex would have out-licensed their lead molecules to BP partners, but I disagreed with the in-licensing timing
Cortex has been talking about it for a long time - I would have preferred that Cortex wait until AFTER a BP deal was signed before doing an in-licensing.
Now I see the need for the timing - although I don't think this precise need has existed for the entire time Cortex has planning for an in-licensing.
But then again, it was exactly for such an unforeseeable event as the FDA's clinical hold that an in-licensing was first considered.
There's NO QUESTION Cortex is going to do an in-licensing, and soon. I re-listened to the CC last night and I'm 100% convinced the in-licensing will happen as quickly as Cortex can get it done. 2Q was repeatedly given as the in-licensing time frame on the CC, I'd even bet it will be early 2Q.
So in a nutshell, if at all possible, Cortex will get another drug in-licensed BEFORE (this is my guess) the FDA's decision.
Then should the FDA decision be bad for CX-717, Cortex would have it's new Phase II in-licensed drug to sell to PIPE investors.
Without an in-licensed drug and with CX-717 dead, Cortex would be trying to sell a PIPE based on CX-701, which won't even be starting Phase I until the middle of this year... Aiming4.