""... All analyst commentary suggested that this Phase III trial would be completed and that Clarity would be able to commercialise at least one diagnostic product in 2025...."
"... I've seen hospital-chasing law firms launch class actions against Boards for (IMO) less egregious non-disclosures than this. Just another fun distraction to throw into the mix ..."
----- Frustrations totally understood; BUT!
a) It’s hard to understand how these analysts concluded that a trial which only began recruiting in December 2023, and was expected not to finish until February 2025, could be commercialised in the same year. That just defies logic!
b) As for class action/litigation statement: In hospitals, a lack of disclosure, on its own, isn’t grounds for litigation - it just increases the risk that if and when real harm occurs, the provider is more exposed. Companies - I don't know, but I suspect you would have to have suffered some material harm due to that non-disclosure. I just can not see how a delay in reporting Phase 1 or 2 results would qualify though! Companies do (and must) hold back their data when something or someone needs to see the data first: journal publications being a simple example. I will have to read more about continuous disclosure rules, but in my thinking: results are company secrets, so I just cant see how they can be forced to reveal them before they are ready! Especially early phase trials!
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)