That's what I would think and hope, investor. If I remember correctly a poster on this board said that management suggested that more phase 2 work would be necessary before going to phase 3 in NSCLC. I hope that's not true. Like you, I think KHK may go ahead with a phase 3 (Depending on the data, of course).
If they have good c-Met data on hand, I think it would be a waste not to go directly to a pivotal trial. The thing about c-Met is that it's not just a biomarker from some sub-group analysis. It's the TARGET of the drug. Also, I would go on to say that the in your development scheme you could conceptually demote the previous phase 3 trial to an all-comer phase 2. Good c-Met high data in that gives you what you need to start a c-Met high phase 3.
To reiterate, I have not actually heard/read management stating a need for more phase 2. Also, the collaborators may be looking at market and clinical data we aren't aware of. So it's obviously hard to know what they will decide and why. But at this point you either have a viable drug or you don't. And medicine is always moving- delaying a phase 3 for several years won't make Tivantinib more viable, but possibly less so.
You took the words right out of my mouth tredleon. This is the only outcome with LPath's bid that is consistent with iSonep having value and the only outcome financially realistic for LPath. Yes, this is a positive. Frankly, I'm relieved.