The shorts are having a really bad weekend. What a bunch of losers. Maybe they can cover at $20 Mon morn. Lmfao!!!!
Doesn't matter. Institutions have obviously lost confidence in this patent business model and are skittish about patent reform, no matter what Vella says about it not affecting their business in a negative way. He must not be communicating with his institutional shareholders. So after beating this down and profiting huge from their shorts, they will probably run this back up and do it all over again.
Catalent, the contract manufacturer, also has engineers and scientists that can easily solve this manufacturing issue
And today's release shows a new product not listed in their pipeline on the website - APC 2000
SAN DIEGO, April 16, 2015 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Adamis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (ADMP) ("Company") today announced the results of a clinical efficacy trial that was conducted outside of the United States for its albuterol HFA product, APC-2000. The study was performed in 124 stable, mild to moderate asthmatic subjects and was designed to reflect the FDA's Albuterol Sulfate June 2013 Draft Guidance.
The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the therapeutic equivalence of Adamis' APC-2000 HFA with GlaxoSmithKline's (GSK) Ventolin Evohaler HFA. To achieve this, the primary endpoint chosen was the equivalence of change from baseline in Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1 AUC 0-6 hours) between the two HFA aerosols assessed at two different doses (100 and 200 mcg).
The study was a randomized double blind, double dummy, four periods crossover, therapeutic equivalence study comparing Adamis' APC-2000 HFA with GSK's Salbutamol Sulphate HFA (Ventolin Evohaler). Two doses of each product were tested, 100 and 200 mcg doses. Each subject received 4 inhalers at each of the 4 periods. These contained two Ventolin (one or both was active or placebo) and two APC-2000 inhalers (one or both was active or placebo). Periods were randomized to reflect the order in which inhalers were taken in each period. There were two washout days between the periods.
The study met the clinical FEV1 primary endpoint and results confirmed the therapeutic equivalence between the test (APC-2000) and the reference product (GSK's Ventolin Evohaler). Both products were found to be safe and well-tolerated. The study also confirmed a significant difference in clinical efficacy between the two doses.
Dr. Dennis J. Carlo, President and CEO of Adamis, stated, "Based on the study conclusions, we predict that our drug (APC-2000) will be as safe and efficacious as Ventolin(R). We expect that this will be confir
If this thing ever hits, mirrorboy will be last thing on my mind. I'll be trying figure out what to do with all my money! Millionaires generally aren't pizzed off
Not convinced, I said most likely. I hope it's not the case. Just jaded from past experiences with small cap biotech and pharma
Dilution doesn't have to be a given if they are willing to license / partner. Their new board member, William Denby, is a successful executive in pharma BD / licensing. Wonder what he's doing to help them with this
Most likely a run up into a capital raise / stock offering dilution. Seen this movie many times before with small pharma co.s post FDA rejection who are cash strapped and refuse to partner / license their clinical products. A good licensing / partnering deal usually includes a large upfront fee and future royalties, plus no dilution.
If you are under an NDA you can't prove anything anyway, right? So what good are you. Hit the road
CEO Vella continues to say in conference calls that congressional patent reform is neutral to positive for Acacia and Wall Street continues to believe otherwise. Who is right? Look at ACTG stock over the past two years. Case closed.
If it was easy, why didn't they get it right and get the FDA approval? FWIW, the FDA doesn't look kindly on pharma companies that don't have a VP Regulatory Affairs responsible for NDA / CMC submissions, and Adamis never had one. Who is responsible for this critical function with the proper credentials? Nobody that I see on their web site or SEC filings
thanks, but I don't know the difference between proven speculation vs. unproven. Very confusing. Can't it be as simple as yes, vcsy is involved, or no, they aren't involved?
This sounds really exciting! goldribbon just needs to post the part of the article that confirms vcsy's direct
involvement and we'll be good to go
Can you please post the part that specifically states how this is related to vcsy? You must have simply forgot to copy and paste that part of the article. Honest mistake, right?