Those statistically significant results for the 2a results...

Those statistically significant results for the 2a results doesn't mean too much when the observation number was low (n = 27). It means a lot and also little, as is hard to say that it will hold for a larger group that may/may not be more heterogeneous than the 2a group (If someone remembers how they picked the groups for the 2b study vs 2a please post what the differences are). Source: studied stats (although not biostats).

When I invest in b'tech (usually around the 2a/b trials) I like to see if the science makes sense, and if there are other little markers that show that it could be successful.Things like enrollments being early, show that doctors are pushing patients into the study, and also if a company has IND status or other regulatory successes (like DMX-200 being used without being approved by the TGA). Those little things add onto the Ph1/2a results to increase my expectation of a better result.