Replies to post #211306 on Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[Pepperchino]

This is sticky-worthy, thank you!

[Amatuer17]

Nice analysis - I am a IPIX skeptic but based in your analysis results look better than what they see in PR

The CSR will have many more details to discuss with FDA and BP - hopefully it will help

[top123]

Plenty - Thank you, and to all longs who posted your views.

[scottsmith]

Thanks for taking the time to compose this analysis. My only issue is that the company (not to mention the board) touted the importance of secondary outcomes, specifically duration. The first two secondary outcomes listed on clinical trials are duration. So what the heck? Where is the duration information and when can we expect it? Your very informative post deals primarily with time of incidence. This is understandable given the data presented. However, your post mostly (imo), glosses over the duration endpoint, which ipix considered more important than incidence. Simply pointing out that other companies failed to provide duration numbers is not satisfactory when ipix, via PRs and on clinical trials, highlighted the importance of duration.

[biodoc]

Great post. Thank you!

[warrenthomas4001]

Thank you for this post. If only the top line authors could compile these facts in such a cogent, functional, sensible manner..

[untohim]

like the post because it allows one to further examine the outstanding variable - that of median time not reached for onset of severe OM...it allows the company to investigate such, tweak the drug, consider in future research, etc.