News Focus
News Focus
Followers 36
Posts 5652
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/09/2003

Re: neuroinv post# 11451

Tuesday, 10/16/2007 3:38:27 PM

Tuesday, October 16, 2007 3:38:27 PM

Post# of 57773
Neuro,

Great post. Thanks for your thoughts.

My question is about your last comment on Schering: Doesn't that take us right back into Psychiatry's fiefdom? I'm wondering--along with gfp, I'm sure--whether, given what's taken place with CX717, Psychiatry would now require even more toxicology studies for whatever molecules are in development over at Organon/Schering, before allowing further trials. Do you (or Davidal) have any sense if Organon's scientists were at all concerned by the findings that turned up with CX717? Do we know for certain that the drugs at Organon underwent the same kind of rigorous screening that CX717 has been subjected to?

I think I understand your concerns aobut narcolepsy/EDS, but given the limited number of options open to COR, doesn't this indication make the most sense for CX701? After all, we do have some clinical data in this indication, and COR can learn from the DARPA failures how to (not) construct the trials. Even CX717 could be tried here again, but with a better trial design.

Does Tran's previous employment at Lilly point to the possibility of a thawing of relations between Lilly and COR? Any sense of why Tran left Lilly? A cursory look at Tran's resume and writings suggest that he was a much better fit for Lilly than he was for Xenoport, at least in terms of clinical development. (Of course, maybe he just wanted to work in a different type environment.) Does Tran's work in schizophrenia and depression give any indication that COR might have something planned in those areas?


Bladerunner

Discover What Traders Are Watching

Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.

Join Today