JRoon71, If Denner knows as much as you about the "prospect" of using a "new patentable form"
of EPA as an adjunct drug for better outcomes (not a cure) for Cancer patients, then I think he would
want to use that to entice BP into making a bid. If BP is interested in Vazkepa as a CVD drug in Europe
they could have exclusivity there until 2029 (according to Holt.) That by itself has a value for a BP as it
is 15 years of sales. What I am suggesting regarding EPA as an adjunct Cancer drug is something a BP
could work on by conducting several proof of concept studies (which is what BRAVE is.) BP will not do
such studies unless they had a version of Vascepa that could be patent protected. MY POINT IS THAT
IF SUCH A VERSION IS BEING DEVELOPED by AMRN, perhaps in secret for now, then BP might be
interested. As an example, MRK has done hundreds of trials with their cancer drug Keytruda. If AMRN
had a patentable version of Vascepa for the future a company such as MRK might want to do a few proof
of concept studies with it and Keytruda. Put another way, this concept might be a way to interest BP in
buying AMRN not just for Vascepa sales, but something potentially more lucrative in the far future.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
