This is a great post, mate. I would love an investor...

This is a great post, mate. I would love an investor presentation on clinical and commercial strategy. Though, there are probably five or more 'strategies' in play at any one time contingent on any new data that emerges. There are some things that I think could be discussed, like the advantages of focusing specifically on cardioprotection first for accelerated approval. It has taken a lot of time thinking to come to what I think are reasonable conclusions about commercial strategy, though I believe new investors will find it difficult to fully understand or connect with.

Perhaps this price action speaks to clinical data being imminent. RC220 does not cause phlebitis in patients, the primary reason Bisantrene wasn't commercialised. Healthy cells are more predictable than cancerous, thus, I am significantly more confident that the lack of phlebitis will continue through the dose levels. Therefore, this is how I see RAC currently.

Bisantrene was developed a very long time ago and has proven safety and tolerability in over 1,500 patients. At the time of its creation, researchers did not fully understand the drug, its mechanisms of action, or how best to use it. Despite this, Bisantrene moved from preclinical to clinical where it displayed efficacy of a standard suitable for approval in AML. I repeat: the researchers did not understand the drug, its mechanisms of action, or how best to use it. Ultimately, Bisantrene was not commercialised because researchers of that era did not have the technology to deliver the drug peripherally without vein inflammation. More than 40 years later, the secrets of Bisantrene have now been understood, which has uncovered the best use for the drug. Moreover, the major problem preventing commercialisation has been solved and proven in a patient, which expands the patent life to 20 years. Bisantrene worked when people didn't know how to use it. I sure am ready to find out how it performs when it's used correctly.