AFAIK, that wouldn't be considered insider trading since there was no trade.
However, there's an even more interesting wrinkle. In that case, you plan trades well in advance, and then cancel them based on insider information. In one case, that was rules to not be insider trading either.
"After Rule 10b5-1 was enacted, the SEC staff publicly took the position that canceling a planned trade made under the safe harbor does not constitute insider trading, even if the person was aware of the inside information when canceling the trade. The SEC stated that, despite the fact that 10b5-1(c) requires trades to be irrevocable, there can be no liability for insider trading under Rule 10b-5 without an actual securities transaction, based on the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723 (1975).[6]"
However, there's an even more interesting wrinkle. In that case, you plan trades well in advance, and then cancel them based on insider information. In one case, that was rules to not be insider trading either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b5-1
"After Rule 10b5-1 was enacted, the SEC staff publicly took the position that canceling a planned trade made under the safe harbor does not constitute insider trading, even if the person was aware of the inside information when canceling the trade. The SEC stated that, despite the fact that 10b5-1(c) requires trades to be irrevocable, there can be no liability for insider trading under Rule 10b-5 without an actual securities transaction, based on the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U.S. 723 (1975).[6]"