My rambling mind asked,"Who has the most to lose f

My rambling mind asked,"Who has the most to lose from LL HIV BLA and other applications" and my first thought was "Whoever makes Maraviroc", Pfizer. Every time I read a study of CCR5 inhibition they are using Maraviroc. So when LL gets approved, you now have a choice for patients of the new HARRT treatment Maraviroc with its Black box warning, that works in about 42% of patients or LL with its excellent safety profile and works in over 80% of patients.
If I'm going to run a study or trial for a new CCR5 inhibition or I'm a doctor looking for a new treatment for my HIV drug resistant patient and hope to get the best results, which one would you use.
Now as time goes on other BPs in oncology, and a plethora of other diseases, they may have something to worry about. But there is no drug, including LL that can take over the oncology market,the way LL may be able to take over the HIV market with Monotherapy.

I would add that in oncology the top dog right now is Merck with Keytruda. They are trying to capture as much of the cancer market as they can because there MOA is common in a lot of cancers. If this new deal with a research institution is a trial with a pd1 inhibitor it is most likely Keytruda because they are the SOC in a lot of indications. But if LL shows a reduction in Metastasis, as their MOA, with any drug, that may be the way LL is approved as an additive to ALL other treatments to reduce metastasis.
Especially because these cancer patients, even on Keytruda have a lot of side affects. If a drug can be added to their regimen, without side affects that's a game changer.

One more thing, if LL is shown to reduce metastasis and is used this way, patients will be on this for years, not months, to reduce the circulating cancer cells. A lot like HIV, testing will show who is responding to the drug and needs to stay on it.