Topline data were December, and that is when any real interest would have started . The clock has been running almost ONE YEAR- NOT starting in May
The May data are critical in the time line of misleading and bogus data from IPIX. As with the pathetic and misleading reporting of P2a, so the laughable small subsets of data re B OM. Insulting bogus data that had no business getting a PR.
Agree that the ease of use the swish and spit for a drug that did well statistically for one subgroup is promising- BUT it was not promising enough to get a BTD. One wonders why, then, those that have looked very carefully at the data- The FDA, that is- saw fit not to grant BTD. Why? If the data are so great then why no deal from pharma, either, after one whole year? Why?