Nice Freegriff, When you say "isn't good enough
Post# of 30067
Posted On: 03/09/2015 11:15:19 PM
Nice Freegriff,
When you say "isn't good enough, meaning not enough for clinicals to change course now" I'm unsure what you mean. Do you mean, start LymPro testing mid-trial? Or beginning testing between say a P1 & a P2?
If companies begin testing early / mid phase, they will have
1) data on patients when/if the next phase begins and
2) be able to remove patients and save money on patients that aren't a "true" candidate for that trials next phase.
I would agree that having any "immediate" useful data collected wouldn't have much "impact" on a trails if started at the end of the phase; unless companies are looking save money and time by eliminating any patients not worth testing. If LymPro shows they would never have been a worthy candidate in the first place. They they could just not even bother analyzing their data and could begin finding replacements Immediately as to not hold up their trail any longer than needed.
Looking at the SAB of Anavax I would tend to say there was a VERY GOOD reason they ok'd and adopted LymPro. That SAB board is massive in the ALZ world.
Great discussion. And by no means am I saying the G'town deal wasn't critical! It solidified AMBS as the leading company in the world. Everyone will have to use us if they want to be recognized as a legitimate company looking for true outcomes of their "potential" drug for ALZ.
Cheers
When you say "isn't good enough, meaning not enough for clinicals to change course now" I'm unsure what you mean. Do you mean, start LymPro testing mid-trial? Or beginning testing between say a P1 & a P2?
If companies begin testing early / mid phase, they will have
1) data on patients when/if the next phase begins and
2) be able to remove patients and save money on patients that aren't a "true" candidate for that trials next phase.
I would agree that having any "immediate" useful data collected wouldn't have much "impact" on a trails if started at the end of the phase; unless companies are looking save money and time by eliminating any patients not worth testing. If LymPro shows they would never have been a worthy candidate in the first place. They they could just not even bother analyzing their data and could begin finding replacements Immediately as to not hold up their trail any longer than needed.
Looking at the SAB of Anavax I would tend to say there was a VERY GOOD reason they ok'd and adopted LymPro. That SAB board is massive in the ALZ world.
Great discussion. And by no means am I saying the G'town deal wasn't critical! It solidified AMBS as the leading company in the world. Everyone will have to use us if they want to be recognized as a legitimate company looking for true outcomes of their "potential" drug for ALZ.
Cheers
(0)
(0)