Maybe I missed it, but wasn't one of the failures

Quote:

---

Maybe I missed it, but wasn't one of the failures in the mono 700mg trial from a flu shot?

---

That was AFAIK due to dual tropism, but not sure.

Quote:

---

Also, I feel the VL breakout is more complicated than they said, because with the higher dose, you have a higher responder rate at 6 weeks. People are different and some need more coverage I suspect based on average # t-cells average # receptors, etc

---

.
Read our review of Thompson's 2018 Opinion https://finesand.wordpress.com/2018/06/18/dis...ected-mab/

Yes, but 700mg shall suffice as it also compensates for PRO 140's half life.

Here some excerpts of papers touching the very issue of Viral Load Rebound due to lack of CCR5 Occupancy.
Back then 2017-2018 it was already highly suspected to be the cause, which now has been proven. This is very important, b/c another cause for rebound could have been tropism change or resistance otherwise and that would have been devastating for Monotherapy outlook - such cause has never been identified!

20180401 PRO_140_a_monoclonal_antibody_targeting_CCR5_as_a_long_acting_single_agent_maintenance_therapy_for_H Re CCR5 Occupancy (VL rebound)


20180615-The_return_of_PRO_140 Re CCR5 Occupancy (VL rebound)




20180615-The_return_of_PRO_140 Re CCR5 Occupancy (VL rebound)

Blog: Find value in the sea of sand