Report top-line data and submit global emergency use authorization applications for opaganib
Not delivered by the deadline
AI-assessed · human review in progress Found and assessed by AI from the cited sources. Shown with its evidence; it is not counted in any Kept Score until confirmed.
- Announced
- 29 Jan 2021
- Due
- 30 Jun 2021
- Checked
- 25 Oct 2026
- Deadline
- Met
- Late
- Not met
- Today
What the company said
“Top-line data, and potential global emergency use authorization applications are expected in the second quarter of 2021.”
What we found
Evidence strength A What the grades mean
The company failed to report top-line data or submit emergency use applications by the end of Q2 2021, with filings from July 2021 confirming delays in data reporting.
-
A RedHill Biopharma Ltd. 6-K filed 2021-07-19
“Such risks and uncertainties include the delay in top-line data from the Phase 2/3 COVID-19 study for opaganib” ✓ confirmed on the page
-
A RedHill Biopharma Ltd. 6-K filed 2021-07-19
“Top-line results are expected in the coming weeks.” ✓ confirmed on the page
-
A RedHill Biopharma Ltd. 20-F filed 2022-03-17
“opaganib data submissions initiated in the fourth quarter of 2021” ✓ confirmed on the page
Market reaction: the shares moved +19.7% against the S&P 500 over the three sessions around the disclosure (16 Jul 2021 to 21 Jul 2021). What this measures
Checked 25 Oct 2026.
Commitment DNA
The structured record of this commitment. Fields the company did not state are left blank rather than guessed.
- Event type
- Clinical readout
- Indicative materiality
- Medium rules
- Action
- Report
- Deliverable
- opaganib top-line data and emergency use authorization applications
- Language
- Expected (“expects”, “plans”)
- In the company’s control
- Medium
- Specificity
- High
- Depends on
- Regulatory
How this entry was checked
- Commitment recordedThe company's words were matched word for word against the filing.
- First checkAn AI model, Gemini (Google), read the company's later filings and recorded the outcome with a quoted passage.
- Second check: agreesA different AI model, Claude (Anthropic), re-read the evidence without being told the outcome and reached the same answer.
- Third check on a negative finding: disagreesBecause a negative finding could harm a company if wrong, a stronger model re-read the evidence fully blind and read it as “Late”, so a person decides.
Not yet confirmed. Shown on the record, but it will not count in any score until it is confirmed. How verification works
Are you RedHill Biopharma Ltd.? You can publish an official statement next to this entry, free. Add a statement.
Is something here wrong or out of date? Companies and readers can ask us to check it. Please bring a link to a public source.
Report an error in this entry Reference: KI-C-2021-RDHL-022650 · Corrections policy