RE:RE:RE:RutherrinAnd did Dr.Lilge then go on to suggest that Rutherrin would not have succeeded with a far greater margin of safety efficacy and adaptability?
If they had been so far inboard with TLD-1433 why all the subsequent flapping about in the middle of Phase 1B? Even now the sp reflects a persisting uncertainty in respect of NMIBC.
And how do they propose to treat any of the internal cancers that don`t present to a surface? If you take the paper of the 8th of April literally then PDT with TLD-1433 followed by x-ray would appear to be an option but in fact everything that they told us up until they stopped telling us anything suggests that they require Rutherrin - not TLD-1433 - for transport and accumulation.
Read the Papers and note the MULTIPLES by which Rutherrin is superior to TLD-1433 or the depths and wavelengths over which it has been effective in settings where TLD-1433 will not deliver.
Rutherrin is the single most valuable asset of this Company and its`Shareholders.
Hank - think that it probably has been animal tested but unlike TLD-1433 they have told us nothing of its`progress through toxicity and GMP over the years.