@bioinvestor24 It's rare in drug development because they most likely traded potency for selectivity, have you ever wondered why they haven't showed selectivity data against darax? You can claim ERAS has a better molecule all you want, fortunately clinical data is what really matters
@GeneInvesting@Bios_n_Techs Those who survive the "superior" drug and not die will enjoy the 10% efficacy improvement over perfectly safe alternatives. Sounds like a good investment
@bioinvestor24 either re-assignment or payment of a huge fine and royalties in double digits, this is not going away for a few millions. You are dreaming if you think the judge will just let it go because it's a drug against cancer, lol. That's not how things work
@bioinvestor24 if a judge finds ERAS-0015 was created as a result of misappropriation of trade secrets a ban of the product is absolutely on the table. If the drug helps patients more than darax (yet to be proven in clinic), the judge may just re-assign the patent to RVMD as a remedy
@bioinvestor24 "There is no reasonable judge that will slow progress of such an effective ( likely more effective ) pancreatic and lung ca drug "
Allowing alleged IP theft to go unchecked would be more harmful to cancer patients in the long term
@bioinvestor24 First, they were in M&A discussions with MRK and possibly ABBV. Second they obviously wanted the 2L data and the raise out of the way. The timing makes perfect sense to me
@bioinvestor24 A $7 billion valuation for a chinese knock-off with no data, lagging 2โ3 years behind the competition, closely chased by a truly next-gen drug, and with patents likely to be challenged in court soon, feels high to me
I was wondering why $ERAS shows affinity but not selectivity data of ERAS-0015 on their slides and I finally found out: $RVMD darax is x3 more selective than ERAS-0015 according to a paper on a third compound (PSTA-2413) that was tested against these 2 https://t.co/P99KWRNdQK