Pipeline-in-a-drug, page-69

The composition and operation of the JSC is dealt with in section 5. The exact number of representatives is redacted but it seems clear it is an equal number from each party. However, in the event that the JSC cannot reach a decision Acadia has final decision-making power to accept a proposal for a new indication for trofinetide (clause 5.4 (f) (i)), so you can take it as read that any proposals will be accepted.

However, the kicker I mentioned above and have posted on previously here, is that for the proposal to actually become a new indication, Acadia has to provide the JSC "evidence of the commencement in the Initial Territory of clinical development, of which ACADIA is the sponsor..." (clause 6.2 (d)).

So what does this mean? It is not defined in the agreement - is it filing of an IND, initiation of clinical trials, or something else? Either of these activities requires a lot of time, effort, and money so I can't see a company with Acadia's modest resources pursuing this with an inferior molecule - but the corporate risk is there for a potential acquirer.

As I mentioned in my post in Jan, the existence of these provisions does make an Acadia/Neuren merger or acquisition the simplest initial course of corporate action which can then be followed by BP acquisition. This has been rattling around in my head since then and I have been intending to clarify the issue with Jon as well as get his thoughts on its implications next week. I won't be asking the question in the public forum.