Considering, Adam is the self proclaimed "biotech guru", who has nothing but a BS in political science from Emory University. I don't see how he can enlighten us about anything, except make money for his masters by posting innuendoes and bashing stocks.
Adam subscribes to a few biotech newsletters and probably has subcontracted with a PharmD with some experience in clinical trials to help him with his clinical reviews. This is evident because on rare occasions he does have some clinically relevant knowledge to pass along. But mostly he's just summarizing what other analysts are telling him through their newsletters.
As for Talon, he made the amateur mistake of using some nonsensical rule of thumb for evaluating Ph.2 single arm, single agent studies. He said the CRR needed to be above 25% or else it would be rejected by the AC panel and FDA. This is like saying every drug, in every disease, in ever disease stage can be measured by the same efficacy bar. What was relevant for Marqibo that Adam missed is the fact that other single agents in the refractory/2nd line space of ALL showed a 4% CRR. Multiple agents could achieve the 20% Marqibo achieved in this same stage, but multiple agents bring multiple adverse events/toxicity, so Marqibo had clear safety advantages over existing multiple agent therapies and equal efficacy to the multiple agents, hence approval and clear superiority to any other single agents. Finally, he totally missed the fact that the marqibo trial had 20% of patients bridging to potentially curative stem cell transplant. That's a big clinically relevant outcome.
Good Post..that nosensical, amateur mistake proves he has no clue about stuff he posts. He is only a harp for those gaming the system. Newsletters are great, but one has to have some natural/medical science bkgd. to understand biotech newsletters and I don't think Adam is endowed in the cerebral department.