Sarepta is actually going for Accelerated Approval, not Breakthrough Designation. So I think the article is clueless and irrelevant on that front.
Plus, why would anyone take drisaperson when it has shown to have kidney and liver toxicity? Also, they STILL haven't released the dystrophin production data, and they won't until October! So as far as we know right now, drisaperson might not even work at all!
The sales (which lets face it here, are the all-important statistic here no matter what) will clearly favor Etiplersen by a mile since it clearly works and has no side-effects.
Sarepta is waiting for the FDA to indicate the best path forward, but it clearly appears they're waiting for an indication whether or not to apply for Accelerated Approval. This is about AA now, that's the key decision awaited. Would anyone question this?
The last meeting with the FDA was for guidance to get this drug to market as quickly as possible. The FDA will indicate which mode would accomplish this, breakthrough or AA, and I'm sure CG will take their advice when submitting the NDA.