RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Montreal's Ventus Therapeutics i think its a reasonable assumption that nash is fading away, maybe im wrong i hope i am but they dont talk much about it and the fact that they said they were in a strong position to negotiate i feel is a bit of a stretch, i have no data to support the comparison beside mdgl basically using a similar method as thtx and mdgl seems to be the front runner for first nash approval.
palinc2000 wrote:
I did not attempt to do a comparative analysis of the Nash data between the THTX and Ventus..
Can you share your findings?
Bucknelly21 wrote:
that's assuming you take paul for his word, not so sure i really do. If you have a company down the road with far less data safety ect sign a partnership you either arent having those talks or its just not a thing. And they need to stop acting as if they are trying.
palinc2000 wrote: Financial markets in research targeting Nash including merger and acquisition potential are in revival mode in the last few weeks/months ....and the last Corporate Presentation mentions ''Actively pursuing discussions with companies that have interest ,capabilities and resources''
qwerty22 wrote: Maybe "Not right now thanks" rather than never. But I think you've mostly got your expectations set right.
longterm56 wrote: If there is not enough interest in Egrifta for NASH to generate a partnership, do you really want THTX to go it alone? I'm sure big pharma has looked at it and has said, "no thanks". So why would they pursue it?
Lee430 wrote: If we did not have this potential high reward cancer platform would Thera have kept their eyes on the NASH prize and it would maybe be in PH3 by now instead of sending it to the time out chair?
Biobob wrote: I understand the frustration since I share it on a daily basis since 1998. I wprobably wont happen but we can hope a business update on October 13 delivers soemthing that makes Paul seemingly more verbal about Th1902...