Hope you don’t mind if I throw a few thoughts in on this matter even though it wasn’t addressed to me.
PS. Could you give us your thoughts about the PD trial now taking place in Europe? Some here speculate the FDA did not think Anavex has enough resources to run 2 trials concurrent to each other.
First off (and I’m pretty dang confident on this), but I don’t believe that companies are required to submit a financial report along with their IND submissions. They go to the FDA with evidence about their drugs not their corporate structure or financial wherewithal. Technically one or two people at a company could contract through CRO’s to run whatever size trial (or even multiple trials) were necessary so I doubt that would be a reason for the FDA to deny Anavex’s request to run multiple trials either.
If we were to assume that the speculation you referenced was indeed correct, are folks ready to claim that the Alzheimer’s trial cannot start in the U.S. until the Rett trial is completed because of that same FDA concern? I doubt it.
Not sure how much time you have to look but there are a variety of reasons to consider the EU instead of the US.
Fireman you made this statement..." Some here speculate the FDA did not think Anavex has enough resources to run 2 trials concurrent to each other." I can only recall one poster that might have inferred this. He/she writes as if he/she knows exactly what Missling and or the FDA is thinking and doing as if it is factual rather than indicating that it is "IMO" (Opinion) or conjecture. It can then become "fake news" and misleading if we are not careful. I might have missed others that have speculated the same and would appreciate knowing if there are more than that one. I place very little credence on these types of ramblings unless they are referenced or a link shown. I appreciate the many posters on this message board, yours included, with so much experience and knowledge that are so well researched and referenced. Thank you for your input here.