Feuerstein is an attention-grabbing reporter, but he’s not exactly trustworthy. In 2002, he implied that the only reason IMCL was testing Erbitux in combination with chemotherapy was to exploit the patent on combo use (the one that, ironically, IMCL ended up losing in the Yeda lawsuit). Feuerstein brushed aside the fact that all preclinical data on the EGFR class strongly suggested that combining the drug with chemo was the way to go.
And let’s not forget Feuerstein’s recent botch re Satraplatin (#msg-17912812).
Take Feuerstein with a grain of salt. He is not the devil incarnate, as some investors assert. Nor is he some kind of mad biotech genius.
UA will have a substantially more neutral trend than Revasc. If so I would suggest that the MOA is actually pretty clear cut. But that doesn't avoid having to have another whopping big trial for the heart disease indication.
What are your thoughts of holding off on a confirming trial for the CV indications and focus a study on the diabetes benefits? Is there a savings in terms of timing to focus on the diabetes indication?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
