Too funny more than double cost is to be taken at face value to be 50% sharing of costs. Nice one!
Steve King: The advantages are on several fronts. #1 is it really gives us the flexibility to run the study in the way we want to run the study & where we want to run it. Because otherwise, we’d have to source Nivo [Opdivo=nivolumab] or one of the other PD-1 inhibitors on a regional basis, in which the drug isn’t approved in lot of different regions where you may want to run the study. So just operationally, it gives us the freedom to more efficiently run a study and get it up & running much quicker than we otherwise would have able to. #2, it really gives us a great opportunity to potentially reduce the cost of what study otherwise would have been, because if we would have to go out and acquire the drug for a clinical study, it could as much as double the cost of the trial. So, it just all around allows us to run a much more efficient trial with the drug that’s in our discussions with the KOLs in the field, people with direct experience, they feel that the PD-L1 antibodies work at least as well as the anti-PD-1 antibodies. Our goal is to answer a key question, which is, “can bavituximab add to the activity of a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor?”, and this allows us doing on a timeframe. So, there are just a lot of huge advantages. I’ll end that with the fact that also we’re working with a what we think is a great partner [AstraZeneca]. They’ve been very interactive so far. They also have a lot of knowledge of PD-L1/PD-L1 status in the patients, which is one of the things we'll want to be looking at as part of both the Ph2 as well as in the other studies we run in NSCLC, as our ability to have a positive impact on potentially those PD-L1 negative tumors, which don’t typically response well the PD-1 therapy. That’s sort of one of those things that’s hard to put a numeric value to, but is a true advantage of working with a great partner.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
