It is an assertion primarily based on the lack of consistency in DNDN itself about how the drug works and changing rationale about which group of people it benefits. They just do not know enough yet about which set of patients this helps, how it works, what is the right clinical trial design and what are the right endpoints. 9902B itself is a trial design that has had multiple revisions.
Given the above, and the exceptionally high hurdle for any interim analysis to succeed, I think taking a gamble at the inflated price of DNDN today is a bad investment.
But you seem to have ignored the broader thrust of my post, which was a response to something about shareholder value. I would quite certainly assert that building long-term shareholder value is about minimizing risk incrementally. For any competent biotech, this means validating any novel agent with multiple inexpensive P2s before a high risk P3, ensuring a broad pipeline with multiple agents in development, and not chasing or hyping stuff like interim analysis based approvals. That inevitably leads to short-term oriented investors who lose money and file class action lawsuits. OTOH, if all biotech mgmt was like this, we wouldnt have the excitement of trading around binary events.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
