RE: RE: Nice post Stooge .."Y
ou don't need a slide-rule to understand that if a drug isn't working in a particular trial the likelihood of it working in another that quacks very much like the first would lead even the stupidest of execs to cut bait and move on.
Pharma doesn't suffer fools or failures...there isn't any time for it.....Pharma also doesn't coddle, give second chances and say better luck next time, here's another 10 million just because you tried hard the first time so let's go at it again."
Sorry to burst your bubble Art, I did get your gist, your logic just isn't that complex.....even for me...
Re-read the above rebuttal and maybe you can figure it out second time around. Slide-rule is in the mail.....
But just in case, let me be crystal clear...
Yes the IIIa is refractory and yes failure on refractory does not explicitly mean first line failure...but here's where the brainpower comes in.....IIIa failure would most certainly mean MCC doesn't get another kick at the can simply because IIIa had already wasted multi-millions in payments.....in a capitalistic society, there aren't too many cases where do-overs are found....whether or not they are deserved or not.
Like I said before, if IIIa doesn't show enough cancer fighting properties, a front line trial won't happen...period....Endo wouldn't waste any more money on it.....why bother when there are plenty of other micro-pharmas out there with the next big thing.....
Endo didn't get to be big and powerful by waiting for bread to grow mold and figuring out after the umpteenth time it's antibacterial....that kind of science and pharma is long long gone.....
So to repeat...one shot one kill.....no do overs, not in this day and age.....now I could be wrong, but that I doubt.
But for you to claim that the NR is basically background noise is pretty nonsensical.....