RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Can’t believe some folks sold on today’s news!Rumpl3StiltSkin wrote: CancerSlayer wrote: CancerSlayer wrote: Enrique wrote:
"We have to beat the competition by a nice margin to be number one and that IMO should not be too hard given that the present competition single agents is 17%CR for Vicinium, 19%CR for Keytruda, and 24% CR for Adstiladrin. We have the potential to make these look like placebos IMO, however we still need more data and for sure we will be able to tell after the next 11 patients are treated. As long as they are all given proper Optimized treatment. The competition's CR rate decreases at 6 months as ours is increasing which is good to see and let's hope it increases even further as we get more data."
Yep...the single agent response rates are pretty dismal & they set a low bar, which our preliminary data has already overcome....& that's based on our "B game" protocol. Looking forward to finally seeing our "A game" play out with our new US teammates.
And where less is better, we've also beaten the competition in terms of the required number of treatments by a "wide" margin. We currently require ~8-10X fewer treatments, which translates into significant cost savings. The single agents will have a projected annual cost of ~$120,000 to $200,000, & possibly higher based on variations in duration of response. Practically speaking, this should also broaden the gap between us & the competition.
Might as well add that our 8-10X "fewer" treatments could also translate into greater treatment compliance as well as happier patients : )...
Should also have the backing of the insurance industry. Even though the $$ cost of each treatment will be much higher. :-)
Though per treatment cost may be higher, I anticipate our full treatment course will end up costing at least 60% less imo. Assuming comparable efficacy, HHS in the US (& ultimately Insurers) will generally go to the lowest bidder.