RE:How long must we waitAgain, the opacity of this management is a big problem. They said in the press release that "efficacy results seen thus far were not convincing enough to pursue enrolling patients and did not outweigh the adverse events see in some patients".
So if what they said is true, there was some efficacy results, just not good enough, but we have no idea what these results are and how many patients showed some efficacy and why toxicity was seen only in some patients.
Call me naive, but if this is true, it seems there could have been a way to give an update pointing to the fact that indeed they very likely have a proof of concept. With a proof of concept the whole situation could be seen very differently because it would no longer be only about TH1902. Yes it would not solve their financial problems in the very shart term, but if you have a proof of concept a partnership deal could be a way to retain a big slice of the pie while gaining help to push the whole platform forward. I think that if they have strong enough data to establish a proof of concept, a good partnership is a possibility. Yes it would be the end of the Trodelvy dream, but there would still be a lot of value in this program for Thera, and the situation would not be as disastrous as it looks now.
That being said, at this point all this scenario is wishful thinking on my part because we don't know what is the real nature of the data they were able to collect thus far. The secrecy behind it leads to think that in fact it is not good at all. We know how Levesque works now. When the news are not good, instead of explaining why, he turns to silence. The problem is that he is no longer working for Pfizer, he works for a small biopharma with few value drivers. You cannot act like big pharmas hiding the results of clinical trials that are not good. In a small public company you need to communicate and explain what is going on.