RE:RE:RE:RE:Good times aheadLets not fall into the easy trap of plot theories against big pharmas as they are all listed on stock exchanges, so all required to perform. A CEO that doesn't perform is ousted. And loses its stock options. Pure and simple. Each of them is free to go chase the best technologies around to increase their market shares, otherwise, one of their competitors will shift them. That's the rules of free markets. After all, Merck didn't pay 40G$US just for fun, knowing it wouldn't outpace its competitors in 10y from today! Future will tell though if they made the best move. Structure of our Ph. 2b trial: If you look also at how TLT approached its CSS (Clinical Study Sites), in Canada they went via the publich health system linked to academic institutions that are required to favor all novel treatments for the benefit of patients first. 2 of our canadian CSS co-chair this CBCIS. If you look at their CSS in the US, all are private clinics, except for the Univ. of Chicago and Univ. of Wisconsin that are linked to academic ones. So big pharmas could plot "all together" as much as they want, they could do little to silence TLT's new treatment if we would be granted Breakthrough, Accelerated Approval designations and ultimately, FDA approval, as TLT could sell directly to private clinics that would capture a growing share of clientele because of this superior treatment. Private clinics could easily advertise themselves, saving expenses to TLT. Of course, for us, investors, that would be going through the slowest path, but TLT could have a way out and be profitable until one big pharma has no other choices and finally decides to jv. But again, one big pharma would have to make a move faster then its competitor and that's what the plot theorists forget to mention; the dynamics of a market, that is of not knowing when one of your competitors will make a move for a technology that could increase its market shares, reduce your market shares. Urologists of private clinics could even buy TLT stocks, because we're traded on public exchanges, so that would be another way for them to favor even more our treatment over the others. So forget about gimmicks from big pharmas to silence us. Data will prevail over plots because of free market conditions. In the history of big pharmas, it has never happened that a Breakthrough/Accelerated Approval award winning biotech for a major cancer indication was left alone/ignored as these 2 designations mean that the FDA recognizes that such treatment is beating anything that is on the market as a SOC (Standard of Care). And we know that the FDA has taken steps in 2018 to force the NMIBC-Unresponsive market to evolve, as per one of the link I posted this morning. Canadian bladder cancer information system - Bladder Cancer Canada CBCIS is a database that collects depersonalized information about current bladder cancer practice and treatment outcomes. CBCIS has been actively enrolling participants in many health centres in Canada (see map below for locations). To date, over 3700 participants have been enrolled in the database.
The CBCIS serves as a Canadian multidisciplinary and multi-centre prospective database platform and resource.
The CBCIS database captures bladder cancer history of the participants as well as their relevant medical information, for further analysis and research. In addition, this database captures contemporary management, practice patterns and outcomes across the entire spectrum of the bladder cancer population.
The goal of CBCIS is identify gaps in bladder cancer care, evaluate unmet needs, and improve the management of bladder cancer patients. Over the next several years, the aim is to have CBCIS become a rich repository to find answers to important questions about the clinical management of bladder cancer.
CBCIS is funded by BCC and other project sponsors. It is managed by a Steering Committee of seven members, with Dr. Wassim Kassouf and
Dr. Peter Black as Co-Chairs.
CBCIS also benefits from the guidance and involvement of an Operations Committee, which includes two physicians from each participating Centre.
| Clinical Study Sites ("CSS") | Principal Investigator |
| University Health Network (“UHN”), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (“PMCC”) (Toronto, Ontario) | Dr. Girish Kulkarni, MD, PhD, FRCSC |
| McGill University Health Centre (“MUHC”) (Montreal, Quebec) | Dr. Wassim Kassouf, MD, CM, FRCSC |
| London Health Sciences Centre Centre (“LHSC”) (London, Ontario) | Dr. Joseph Chin, MD, FRSC |
| Nova Scotia Health Authority (“NSHA”) (Halifax, Nova Scotia) | Dr. Ricardo Rendon, MD, FRCSC |
| University of British Columbia Columbia (“UBC”) (Vancouver, British Columbia) | Dr. Peter Black, MD, FRCSC |
| Virginia Urology (“VU”) (Richmond, Virginia) | Dr. Eugene Kramolowsky II, M.D. |
| Urology Associates P.C. (“UA”) (Nashville, Tennessee) | Dr. Gautam Jayram, M.D. |
| MidLantic Urology (“MLU”) (Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania) | Dr. Laurence H. Belkoff, DO, MSc. FACOS |
| Carolina Urologic Research Center (“CURC”) (Myrtle Beach, South Carolina) | Dr. Neal Shore, MD, FACS |
| University of Wisconsin-Madison (“UWM”) (Madison, Wisconsin) | Dr. Kyle A. Richards, MD, FACS |
| Urology San Antonio (“USA”) (San Antonio, Texas) | Dr. Daniel Saltzstein, MD |
| University of Chicago Medicine (“UChicago Medicine”) (Chicago, IL) | Dr. Piyush Agarwal, MD |