Ann: AGM Presentation, page-51

Good to see all kinds of opinions here.
HC is often a heavily biased echo chamber. People should value critical questioning and actually appraise how well those concerns are addressed.

The statistical significance comment seems like a valid point and hence why more work is being conducted. p=0.25 means that there is a 25% chance of getting this result (at least -17%) under the assumption that the null hypothesis is true (namely, that the drug isn't the cause of the effect). Furthermore, the 95% CI means the 95% confidence interval or two standard deviations and that says that there is a 95% chance that the effect is between -43% and +20%. So significant uncertainty and hardly surprising it's not shown in the presentations (as vrs37 mentions that it's from a scientific poster of all places!) and why Phase 3 numbers are critical to confirm the findings.

As a counter argument, perhaps to vrs37, why do you think Advanz Pharma happily made the $10.7million upfront payment on this at this stage? Do they have better/updated data perhaps?