Its very interesting that the placebo had a 38% SRI response. Just shows you the power of the human mind. To me this suggests that 38% of the placebo patients responded to treatment of what was likely a sugar pill. i.e. their disease changed due to the placebo treatment. One assumes positively.
Maybe the NHS should be handing out candy and telling everyone its a wonder drug :)
ah, that might explain it. VAL's directors also participated in a funding, albeit more modestly, as the start of the 201 trial. So nothing material would have been known there.
I thought that IMM were a little further into Phase 3. Before data starts appearing internally, I think their hands would be untied. Should be good day for them tomorrow, as that RNS came out after hours on Friday.
I sometimes think we could do with a bio. thread in the general chat section of this site where any of the wider issues affecting all bios could be discussed in a non partisan way. Items such as the clinical development process and the regulations surrounding it, funding, legislative changes etc. etc. A place to pool knowledge and research - so very important if you're going to invest long in bios.
The Imm P3 trial has only just started in a few centres. They are still recruiting and expect to be at full strength by year end. So there is no doubt in my mind that director buys at this time are quite in order.
The suggestion that Panmure Gordon are somehow less 'squeaky clean' than Cairn is utterly bizarre.
Only - why would there need to be meetings between the clinical team and the Company? The CRO are running the trial. Decisions on the continuation of the trial are down to the DMC. How can any inferences be made on the results of a phase III trial while the data is still blinded? IMM have roughly 30 trial centres to recruit 200 patients - that's approx. 6 to 7 patients per centre, half of whom will be given a placebo. Please explain just how the IMM CSO can be in receipt of any insider information whatsoever.
To cast aspersions (no matter how subtle) on Immupharma's CSO and NOMAD regarding insider knowledge is a serious matter. To do so just to promote your own stock is not only a poor show but insulting to the intelligence of anyone reading these boards.
There is no competition between UK AIM listed bios. Anything that improves sentiment and brings new investors to the sector should be welcomed, so success for Immupharma is positive for Valirx and vice versa. Anybody knocking one thinking it helps the other is not only sorely mistaken but also has no concept of just where any of these companies sit in the grand scheme of things.
Surely half way through a Phase III double-blind trial some inferences can start to be made at an overall level ?
The issue is then one of secrecy within the clinical trial team. But there will need to be meetings with the pharma company and some kind of feedback, even if it's limited to 'the trial is continuing', may be shared, legitimately.
What he's trying to do is criticise IMM in order to justify the real outrage - that VAL are hiding behind an incorrect NOMAD decision which they claim prevents them buying shares. In other words, he's trying to say that IMM are wrong; so therefore VAL are right.
The truth is that both the IMM and VAL board are free to buy shares in their own companies. IMM have faith in their product and have done so, perfectly legally. VAL do not have the same faith in their product and will not buy shares in their own company.
Guys, the VAL board are telling you what they think of their product.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.