RE:RE:RE:RE:NewsMacer wrote: Thor6570 wrote: Quite confusing for me. Seems the company included patients whom should not have been included ?
Not exactly.
It would appear that the protocol written was too stringent for patients that did demonstrate a response but still had disease that had no progression. (i.e. not a complete response but at least no worse off than before the trial). These patients should still be eligable for retreatment but the protocol was that they are removed from the trial.
It speaks to how complex this treatment actually is. I think there will be additional CR identified in the subgroup that require further examination. And they need to adjust the dosing protocol as mentioned and then the results will improve even more.
MAcer
Nice Macer, I agree and also think they will improve screening having learned from this. The only thing I am disapointed about is perhaps no US testing this year. :-(