Replies to post #5232 on Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc (AUPH)

[biotech_researcher]

"due to AUPH's really strong position/advantages. "

Moose, can you add more color to that statement??

[Lunacy_John Galt]

That 30% was incorrect by MF. Take a look at this attachment for a better reference.

I believe we're much closer to 80-85% given 1 single Ph3 trial exact duplicate of Ph2 with P-Value of <.001. Fast track approval and open communication with FDA while designing Ph3 protocol to meet FDA approval guidelines. FDA basically told AUPH, do it one more time and you're good. P-Value of <.001 means there's less than 1 in 1000 chance it was a fluke...I like those odds!

I'm guessing MF keeps putting out articles on AUPH because we have so many retail eyes on us right now, and they can attract a lot of people with their click-bate on the bottom of each article.

https://www.bio.org/sites/default/files/Clinical%20Development%20Success%20Rates%202006-2015%20-%20BIO,%20Biomedtracker,%20Amplion%202016.pdf

[Jesspro]

Moose, As I said before, the more they delay the BO, the costlier it gets for them. Unless the p2 results are bogus, the longs are in for a big payday. The p2 results data has been validated and confirmed by the medical world as a resounding success. I can't see healthier p3 LN patients not responding equally or better than P2 patients since both trials have the same design protocol. We are in good shape but we definitely will hear whining and moaning from some retail investors who watch the pps on a daily basis.