whats up here, page-66

It does seem a little damning, and that it may have been misrepresented about Teva not seeing data summary results at least.

However there is the possibility that Teva used this for an out conveniently. I say this because it was reported well before results were available, in an Israel newspaper? , that Teva would be looking to unload the Mesoblast situation. I can't find it and wonder if others with better memories can clarify this.
If this is the case then it creates a murky area, leading to an answer that only a few would know, but
What is the definition of fail? because the examiners said continue (probably because there was no negative flag),
If the surrogate end points were reasonable to good did Teva still want out regardless future earnings possibilities because of the new financial commitments they were loaded with, and Mesoblast was confident enough to accept their departure to regain 100 equity even thought here was a financial burden to deal with.
I know some would say this thought is clutching at straws, but nothing adds completely up either way you choose to look at it.
As per normal their is a deficiency of information and retail statements made about this from the company. That concerns me, that not to fully clarify looks like evasion.
Would Teva give it back even if the surrogates were showing some efficacy, and would Mesoblast accept their withdrawal if it wasn't a fail? The talk in Israel was they wanted out before the information was available.