RE:Share consolidationWell, in a few weeks we will hear on 1st quarter sales which they've already said were on target. Half the jump is price related so it only takes converting a percentage of both therapies patients to retain the program and then have some net adds - that seems to be what has been happening over the last 2 years. That will start the process of rebuilding a thesis around sales and cost containment so bottom line comes in to view in next 4 quarters.
Anything "extraordinary" has been completely tilted the other way because at this point the market is in complete show-me on both pipeline assets and assumes not much comes of them in the short or mid-term. Given that view, any extraordinary could only be positive as we expect nothing. Saying the SAC has reviewed all the data, found it helpful and supportive of tweaking the approach, in my book, would be a positive given they are outside, objective experts who have no skin-in-the-game to push forward if nothing is there. It's still experimental, but that would be a vote of confidence that there is something worth pursuing in thier judgement as oncology development experts. Restarting the trial with a quick limited enrollment to see if the data moves as they theorize it should would be the super=positive "extraordinary". We'll have to see what the data informed them on and go from there. Between a data-driven dose and regimen adjustment, a far-better patient screening approach, understanding of pre-therapy interactions, and focusing on a few cancer types they may increase the chances of seeing responses by a multiple factor...or not. But having 6-7 experts explore whether there is even a path ahead will be interesting to hear about to understand what led them to that conclusion.