Jon remarked that with HIE, that it is much easier to identify the "population" than with the other indications in general and one knows where to find them. I agree with comments that with it being and critical, pretty much finite occurrence with known, potentially dire consequences, that recruitment would be much easier and quicker. In USA, with 6,000+ candidates per annum to get the requisite number for a significant trial. Say need, 300(?) 250 treated, 50 placebo? even if only a quarter of parents willing to participate ( I would be stunned if it would be anywhere new this low) you would have your recruitments done within 3 months. Or am I overly optimistic? Surely a treatment of this potential importance would receive fast-track designation at very least, Break Through designation also? There also must be quite a large existing pool of sufferers born in the last 5 years or so, to carry out trial to ascertain the effectiveness to repair impairments of delayed treatment patients. If effectiveness was found to be significant then the product has a very attractive market to have significant initial sales depending on how many years after incidence the repair can be significant. i.e. if 5 years x 6000 that means 30,000 x penetration rate (60%) x say one years treatment (?)@ USD 350,000 (?) = USD 6.3 billion on going sales for new surviving cases 6,000 x 80% (presuming higher penetration ongoing) x USD350,000 = USB 1.7 billion. One other consideration is whether there would be more "surviving" babies if there is an effective treatment for brain related issues?
NEU Price at posting:
$14.14 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
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)