Post
of 161,624
the leron reduction of fibrosis:
it was minor. i was thinking i recalled in the teens vs placebo single digit. when i google it now i see "up to 10%"... a very Nader like interpretation... meaning at least 1 patient was 10%. i recall the placebo rate was smaller than i would expected and i kinda discounted the data entirely because 1) the % decline wasn't so great, the placebo effect seemed much lower than other trials, the 350 did better than 700, the fatty deposit endpoint didnt meet the industry standard for NASH MASH.
leron is s good drug and versatile. NASH just wasnt a great fit. liver mets is probably a better fit. liver mets has been seen in mss-crc from ccr5 inhibition for example. and tnbc mets data was strong mo. i mean anything beating back mets is a big deal.
it was minor. i was thinking i recalled in the teens vs placebo single digit. when i google it now i see "up to 10%"... a very Nader like interpretation... meaning at least 1 patient was 10%. i recall the placebo rate was smaller than i would expected and i kinda discounted the data entirely because 1) the % decline wasn't so great, the placebo effect seemed much lower than other trials, the 350 did better than 700, the fatty deposit endpoint didnt meet the industry standard for NASH MASH.
leron is s good drug and versatile. NASH just wasnt a great fit. liver mets is probably a better fit. liver mets has been seen in mss-crc from ccr5 inhibition for example. and tnbc mets data was strong mo. i mean anything beating back mets is a big deal.
3