InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

enemem

11/18/10 11:12 AM

#34873 RE: drfreely #34872

Another way forward is the reverse of the one I've been proposing for some time now: a very broad out-licensing of the high impacts, to fund development of the low-impacts.

If the Servier trial establishes an effective dosage range that is far from the dosage range that induces seizures, such a deal could happen.

The advantage of relinquishing high-impact IP to develop low-impact IP is that the low-impacts are closer to the clinic, and hence could generate profits sooner. Also, seizure risk is much lower, so low impacts have a better chance of getting FDA approval.

I don't know how they'll get there, but I think that somehow corx will find its way to profitability. Unfortunately, it is going to be still more difficult to get there without wiping out current stock-holders in the process.
icon url

jerrydylan

11/18/10 12:46 PM

#34874 RE: drfreely #34872

Hunter S Thompson has nothing on you. Anyone out there seeing the whole RNAI world seemingly imploding?....I always thought it and Mabs for neurological issues( including the amyloid targeted ones) were easy to predict flops.