I have an issue with "performance of scans," also.

I have an issue with "performance of scans," also. Imaging was called for in the protocal at 60 days. They continued into the second cohort, yet there were likely no scans.

I am going to keep my opinion that perceived benefits deals with only the fact that the patient and doctor agree that it wasnt making them worse and it might even make them better.

If they stayed on protocal (which is what they did it is DF, for goodness sakes!) there were not even scans done when they started the 3rd cycle. That would have been at 57 days.

If I am off on this please let me know.