Well, incidence numbers do look good - about the same as with GC4419 and Dusquetide, which I think are the two serious contenders. Brilacidin's delay of onset also seems to be similar to GC4419. I truly wish that Leo had released duration numbers. He didn't, sigh. Dusquetide had reduction from placebo 18 day to treatment 9 days. GC4419 median duration is probably what they say 1.5 to 2 days, maybe 3, but likely not more. These numbers are all medians calculated over ITT.
So, if brilacidin duration reduction (my guess) is 30 % or better we should be fine because Duesquetide has the problem of very low incident rate reduction (6 %), which may trip it's commercial changes.
It seems that IV drugs, for some reason have better duration numbers that oral. Even Kepivance scores medians of 4.5 and 5 days. But, then they have much higher risk of drug interaction (doing Kepivance in one indication revision at the time) than oral drugs. It is sort of wash - nice duration, if you can have it vs near certainty of no drug interactions but longer duration of SOM.
I guess there is room for both B and G.
BTW: check KMBJN:n post. There is a nice link to some earlier results with GC4419. That cleared me how GC4419 numbers are calculated. The article you found probably suffers from misunderstanding by the reporter.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
