If you watch the interview, it seems like Elanco were not...

If you watch the interview, it seems like Elanco were not impressed with only 2 dogs having tumor regression (1 regression, 1 totally gone). Or at least they were not impressed enough to offer the deal Pharmaust was looking for, but we don't know that for sure. The Bayer buyout possibly factored in- it is likely to be multiple reasons, not least of all the hard data. Roger mentioned that that trial was not using optimized dosing, something they have been working on since the trial took place, and he believes this will bring higher numbers of dogs with tumor regression. What I took away is that PAA need to run another trial with a highly optimized dose of MPL to produce more compelling tumor regression figures, and Elanco will come back to the table. I doubt PAA will be looking for another partner unless they get a hard no from Elanco after this, as it's in their interest to maintain their relationship with Elanco as Elanco have a history of providing them with MPL. They still hold the patents until the early to mid 2020's. The ball is back in our court for now, but thank goodness there's plenty on PAA's plate in the meantime.