Global Phase 3 Clinical Trials

Global Phase 3 Clinical Trials

Most Korean new drug development companies share a business model of licensing out during phase 1 and 2 clinical trials. However, there is an opinion that Korean companies should directly pursue global phase 3 and attempt permission in this way, believing that growth is slow.

It may vary from disease to disease, but it will probably cost at least 300 billion won. If this money can be raised from the private sector, I think it is okay to pursue the global phase 3. This is because private funds would have appreciated the possibility of success.

However, I do not readily agree with the opinion of supporting the three global phases with public funds. This is because the opportunity cost and negative impact of failure are too great. Even if you invest 10 billion won in early start-ups with that money, you can give 30 companies opportunities. Wouldn't it be more in line with the public value to spray public funds so widely to solve the financing problems of early companies?

And most of all, if licensed substances continue to successfully pass phase 3 and the unfortunate situation continues to emerge, saying, "If we had done that ourselves, we would have had a bigger profit," the opinion of directly promoting the phase 3 global would be persuasive. However, if there are many cases where technology transfer materials drop out and return and pass the phase 3 global, it seems hard to persuade the opinion of directly promoting the phase 3 global. The opinion that "Let's push for phase 3 directly because we continue to fail after licensing" is a bit contradictory. There are nine days left before the April 10 election. Now, it seems that the corruptive government newspapers have judged that it is difficult to ignore the public opinion of the citizens who are angry with the political prosecutor administration to report distorting public opinion by misleading public opinion.

When asked by the Dong-A Ilbo on April 1, "Which party would you vote for in the parliamentary elections in your constituency if today is the voting day?" 45.5 percent said they would vote for the Minjoo Party candidate and 34.7 percent said they would vote for the ruling People's Power candidate. The gap between the two parties is 10.8 percentage points, which is outside the margin of error (±3.1 percent).

The willingness to vote for proportional representation parties was 29.8 percent for the Future of the People, followed by 24.0 percent for the Grand National Party of Korea and 20.6 percent for the Democratic United Party. Combined with the Grand National Party of Korea and the Democratic United Party, the figure stands at 44.6 percent, 14.8 percentage points higher than the future of the people.

From my perspective on the political situation of public opinion, the Dong-A Ilbo's survey seems to have only surveyed the surface layers of public opinion. The actual anger gauge of the citizens of the Anti-Yoon Seok-yeol and Anti-People Power Party is wider, deeper and higher.

—The Dong-A Ilbo commissioned Research & Research to conduct the survey on 1,004 adult men and women across the country on April 28 and 29. The survey was conducted through a 100% wireless telephone interview method, with a 95% confidence level with a sampling error of ±3.1 percentage points and a 9.3 percent response rate. For more information, please visit the website of the National Election Opinion Review Committee.🧊 Why is clean energy still sluggish?

If there's a winning bet, there's a losing bet. We bet on the possibility of clean energy, which was in a three-year recession last October.

The result? It's still sluggish. Of course, it's been a share of investment near the market's lows, but Clean Energy is still out of a trending bear market where most companies still don't even cross the 50-day horizon.

Enpage, which was considered a vanguard of recovery, has fallen by as much as 40% since then. Of course, it has recovered by 60% since then, but the stock is still generally sluggish.

This article introduces three notable companies for the reasons behind the sluggish clean energy, the potential for the industry to recover, and for investors approaching the long term.