All of the above comments are fine but the statement in the Quarterly is also very clear - "Neuren has an obligation not to develop NNZ-2591 or any other product for North America in an indication for which Acadia develops Trofinetide, except for Phelan-McDermid, Pitt Hopkins, Angelman and Prader-Willi syndromes".
The key will be whether Acadia develops Trofinetide in any other indication. If they do, the statement is clear - Neuren cannot progress 2591 in that indication.
While it is great that we have the four inidications, what is to stop Acadia commencing P1 trials for Trofinetide in Parkinsons, Alzheimers, Concussion/TBI, MND or even any non-neurological conditions like obesity and/or diabetes - where efficacy signals were evident in the mouse model for Prader Wili if I am not mistaken. The "big" indications are the ones we want to keep on the table unless I am misreading the potential of 2591...
They have us dead to rights if they choose to. Admittedly, I have not practised as a lawyer in some time so my interpretation could be off the mark but I don't think that clause serves us well. It relies an awful lot on the goodwill of Acadia and does not leave us free to pursue any outcome for 2591 (save Retts and FX) without relying on said goodwill.
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)