<<Would there be any sensible or logical reason to withhold a positive result>>
That's the wrong question for Big Pharma. The correct question is--Would there be any sensible or logical reason to disclose results? With BP, you often don't know how a Phase II turned out unless and until they reveal, in an analysts day presentation, or on their pipeline chart--that a project has been advanced to Phase III. With the merger underway, it is unlikely that a Phase II project is going to be advanced to Phase III until the merger and portfolio review are completed.
What is the advantage to Merck or SP to announce results? Without an answer to that, the default is to not say anything.
This doesnt mean the trials were successful, Gfp raises good points about the unknown confluence of the dosing and potency issues. But silence does not tell us anything about the results.
NeuroInvestment
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
