I think they probably over compensated for injection site comfort, it adversely affected efficacy.
I think you may be spot on here. The tolerability issues are gone but 105 and 107 didn't work as quickly as Linjeta. There was also the tail washout issues with 105 and 107.
As of making existing analog UFI, I don't have any data from them as basis to have an opinion. So I don't know.
They mentioned in the CC that analogs themselves don't have washout issues so that presumably shouldn't be an issue with BIOD's potentially improved analog. The big question is presumably whether or not BIOD's version will work much quicker than the existing analog and whether or not that will end up translating into a meaningful clinical benefit. More near-term the important question is if these theoretical advantages and the pre-clinical data are enough to convince the potential big pharma partner to do a deal with BIOD. Like you say, we should know by the end of this quarter.