Thanks RLSmi for your post.

1. Regarding the comparison of IPX066 to currently available drugs, according to Impax, IPX066:

A. Provides rapid initial increase in concentrations comparable to Sinemet and Sinemet CR; and
B. Maintains sustained concentrations for a prolonged duration vs. Sinemet, Sinemet CR and Stalevo.

There's a chart in a presentation they made at a Jefferies conference that shows the data.

You can google "IPX066 Jefferies" to find it.

2. I see no reason why the availability of IPX066 will in any way affect the availability of existing drugs. Also, you're right that IPX066 most probably will be higher priced.

3. I participated in the ongoing double blind trial in which IPX066 was compared to Sinemet. It was very obvious to me when I had taken IPX066 and when I had taken Sinemet. IPX066 was far better at eliminating my PD symptoms and one dose lasted about 50% longer. BTW, I previously tried Stalevo, but had to drop it due to severe side effects. From what I can recall, IPX066 worked much better than Stalevo.

4. Finally, my main reason for posting this topic is not to compare one drug vs another, but to raise the ethical question of whether a drug company should continue to provide a trial drug to test volunteers if it is working far better than available alternatives. I feel very strongly that the drug company has this obligation in return for the test participant taking whatever risks are involved in the test program. I hope you agree with me and will contact Impax Labs to support this position. Thanks.