Entdoc, you certainly understand the science of bavi. I am not a science guy so please bare with me. Anyone who has a clear understanding is more than welcome to chime in. Forgive the language barrier on my part. It may take a Wookie to give a layman's interpretation to the science group to make this more understandable.
About a year ago Peregrine made a shift in Bavi's MOA. I get it. MOA shifts happen frequently as new developments pan out in trials. But, as I see it to be, PS is the "upstream" to the PD's (multiple forms) downstream. This is what causes Bavi to be a better combination drug than a primary treatment, correct? If you can control the upstream and downstream you have a better shot at reducing or eliminating the problem (cancer or virus).
So, here is my concern. When that MOA shift was made, was the term "upstream" and "downstream" coined by Peregrine at the time? Or is it a generally known term in the science arena regarding this PS/PD cellular relationship? In other words, is the biotech world and Wall Street seeing Peregrine trying to claim "upstream" control as a marketing ploy? And, if so, they may believe "upstream" is not necessary. Thus, we sit at $300M market cap. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
