prima biomed: time to change leader, page-15

Primas recent announcement and press releases suggest that the management changes are aimed at positioning the company for the next stage in its growth.

But by contrast, I've heard speculation that the changes might have been triggered by other factors including less than favorable phase 2b data or poor phase 3 recruitment.

In the absence of any direct evidence from the company, the few indications I can find, imo fail to support either of these theories.

1. The 2b trial is not blinded. The company knows how the trial is progressing. For the past week PRR has been advertising three new positions. One of these is for a well credentialed US based 'Global Medical Director' with a major role in trial organization and administration. In my opinion PRR is unlikely to be hiring key phase 3 trial related personnel if the evidence suggests that the 2b trial is a failure.

http://jobview.monster.com/getjob.aspx?jobid=110168643&WT.mc_n=Indeed_US&from=indeed

2. Over the past year, several Cvac phase 2b trial candidates have posted on various patient forums. (eg: www.inspire.com )I have seen no suggestion of adverse progress from any of these ladies. I hope it continues.

3.And as I’ve posted previously, MR told an Ord Minnet briefing in December 2011, that "at this stage all the patients are in good health ......” That was a year and a half into the trial. (HC post #7548695)

4. And re phase 3 recruitment: Given that the phase 3 trial is just starting, and only 9 of the 97 trial sites have commenced recruiting (2 in Florida, 7 in the Ukraine), I don't think a suggestion of poor enrolment is of any relevance at this stage.

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01521143?show_locs=Y#locn
.......................................................

We all make our own decisions on capital preservation and buy/sell triggers. But I'd be disappointed if shareholders were shaken out of the trees based on speculation that imo isn't supported by available evidence.
.......................................................

Both trials have a long way to go. Shareholders will have plenty of opportunity to assess the capabilities of the new CEO and other appointments. But ultimately it will be the efficacy of Cvac that matters most.

I appreciate the role MR played in resurrecting the company. He steps down as CEO with the company dual listed, trials on track and well funded, and with capable senior personnel experienced in the FDA processes.

I think shareholders have a lot to look forward to.

Good luck all. Herro