RE:RE:RE:RE:Feuerstein-Ratain RuleThe FR rule actually offers an excellent piece of investment advice. Don't invest in a company with a market cap of less than $300 million if the reason you're thinking of doing it is because the company has a cancer drug in phase 3. The rule predicts that the company's phase 3 trial will fail.
It's a scary rule, or at least a scary observation on the parts of Feuersteinand and Ratain. It's an observation that if a company has taken a cancer drug all the way through phases 1 and 2, and if investors still don't like the company, then neither should we. It would be foolish to accept that as a "rule" if for no other reason than the Cubs and Red Sox didn't win a World Serries for a hundred years, but eventually did. But, I think all of us would look carefully before we leapt. (I think Resverlogix has a problem in that regard. They have not met previous trial endpoints, are in phase 3, and investors don't like the company too much. Are we looking at the unconscious application of the FR rule? Maybe, but the market could be very wrong. RVX could very well still have its day in the sun.)
The FR rule does not apply to Bioasis. We're not even approaching phase 3. Investors cannot make the type of judgement about Bioasis that the FR rule references. I spent a lot of time over the last couple of days privately reassuring shareholders that the rule does not apply to Bioasis. It might in the distant future, but certainly not now. Here's why.
Bioasis plans to start a phase 1b trial with xB3-001. The trial's patients will be very sick people. It is unethical to do only the usual phase 1 dosing and safety testing with them. They must actually be treated for efficacy. A lot of people will likely be watching this trial. They most certainly will start watching if phase 1b is successful.
Like the Edison Group, I have to be really careful about making share price predictions. Both they and I have relationships with Bioasis. But if Bioasis has a successful phase 1b and for the first time in history gets an effective cancer drug into the human brain, then the question of the FR rule ever becoming applicable could become moot.
No company that can effectively treat brain tumours in phase 1b is likely to remain a microcap for long. And if meetings with the FDA, post phase 1b, indicate that phase 2 will be designed to facilitate an FDA decision to grant breakthrough status to xB3-001, then the market may very well look upon that as a positive, further distancing Bioasis from the FR rule.
And if the investing public begins to realize that xB3-001 could be approved for commercial release without going through phase 3, that post phase 2 it could be a player for billions in annual revenue, frankly, if any investor can't figure out that there's something special going on here, then that investor should close his accounts and stay out of it.
I'll stick with my contention that raising the Feuersteinand-Ratain rule on this forum was irresponsible. It was needless provocation that came from somebody whose ego needed a little more bouyancy. It doesn't apply to Bioasis in any way. We're not even close to those terms of assessment at this point. But if the word "irrrsponsible" is too strong for my friend's gentle sensibilities, then I suggest he goes golfing or something, to go do something that is less combative than grenade tossing on anonymous bullboards.
jdstox