As I said, I truly admire their openness (on specific data). And also note that now we can go back and calculate whether they hid something that they "knew":
a) P value of 50mg vs placebo - nowhere near stat sig even now (p=0.2). The p value is limited by the size of the placebo group (undoubtedly due to the open label safety trials)
b) P value of 50mg vs 25mg - 0.007 (Using Fisher's Exact). Stat sig, and it would have been stat sig at probably 2/3 the size.
Combining a and b I'll give HPT a double.
BUT note that getting that much data has a clear benefit that could not have been obtained had they shut down at the first sign of trouble. It is clearly dose dependent. So the drug is still viable. So HPT gets a whiff on this one.
After looking at a bunch of the data on this issue and others I would characterize RPRX as being very open about specific data when asked. Substantially more so than most companies. But very much a practitioner of "Not asked, don't tell" (I only know of a few companies that are avoid this tendency). Characterization that is useful going forward.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
