I have received some info from a poster who prefer
Post# of 72446
(Total Views: 306)
Posted On: 08/07/2017 10:56:50 AM
I have received some info from a poster who prefers to remain anonymous, even to me, but IMO he is quite learned in medical matters and has many excellent ideas. He has given the OK to post some of his thoughts and I will as I deem ideas beneficial to all. In response to my thoughts regarding the 22% of patients that didn't respond to the B-OM in the interim data report he stated:
"The trial was for head and neck cancer, the most difficult . Sometimes there is a combination of surgery, chemo, and radiation . That makes it far likelier that the 20% failure rate was seen ; it will be much improved when others with much less serious cancers and chemos are allowed.
It angers me that we were given such a high bar; I am ecstatic we had 70% success."
My take from the above is that maybe then all we need is a much higher dosage for the head and neck cancer patients or a heavier dosing schedule per Drano's post. This statement is just my WAG.
Nice to know that the interim data even with the 22% non-responsive rate was still such a great result.
As to my thought about world organizations helping funding for successful trials to keep treatment costs down, he said that was a foolish idea in that if we only paid sums to those drugs that made it to commercialization and did keep treatment costs down, then how could BP's ever recover their massive costs for far more trials that ended in failure since their successes wouldn't allow the large profit margins necessary to cover those large number of failures. Great point IMO.
"The trial was for head and neck cancer, the most difficult . Sometimes there is a combination of surgery, chemo, and radiation . That makes it far likelier that the 20% failure rate was seen ; it will be much improved when others with much less serious cancers and chemos are allowed.
It angers me that we were given such a high bar; I am ecstatic we had 70% success."
My take from the above is that maybe then all we need is a much higher dosage for the head and neck cancer patients or a heavier dosing schedule per Drano's post. This statement is just my WAG.
Nice to know that the interim data even with the 22% non-responsive rate was still such a great result.
As to my thought about world organizations helping funding for successful trials to keep treatment costs down, he said that was a foolish idea in that if we only paid sums to those drugs that made it to commercialization and did keep treatment costs down, then how could BP's ever recover their massive costs for far more trials that ended in failure since their successes wouldn't allow the large profit margins necessary to cover those large number of failures. Great point IMO.
(2)
(0)