Good news indeed...

Looking at the inclusion criteria, we're going after the same patient population.

But, some encouraging thoughts:

1) ACC is administered three times a day (inhaler) or four times a day (sublingual). This regimen is very inconvenient compared to twice a day (oral) dosing for apabetalone. Considering these drugs are administered by nurses at a hospital, staff cost is also involved in each administration, i.e. higher administration cost with the ACC vs. apabetalone.

2) Looking at the exclusion criteria, ACC seems to be contraindicated in some patieints with renal issues and/or electrolyte disorders. The exclusion criteria for apabetalone are numerous too. However, these seem to be more for clinical trial purpose, i.e., to get relatively healthier sample population. 

3) Marginal profit for apabetalone is much higher compared to ACC. A pill doesn't cost a lot to produce. For the same number of units sold, apabetalone would generate much more profit vs. ACC. ACC inhaler form is delivered by Circulaire, which seems to be a third party delivery system for which they may have to pay fee. Sublingual form would also definitely cost more to produce than a pill. Obviously, the more expensive a drug costs, the more burden it would impose on the health care system (not just less profit for drug company).

Waiting until that apabetalone is proved to be the miracle drug that everyone 's waiting for...