RE:RE:Chewing the fat. .5 .7 1. doses thoughts However when we get next data if 2 out of 3 or more from patients 16,17 and 18 are CR , then we should fly IMo, that would be very impressive.
enriquesuave wrote:
On average the 1st 12 patients of PH2 got undertreated by 75% and not 30% . In PH1, of the 3 patients treated at the high dose, only 5 &6 got an optimized treatment, not patient 4. We need a good 10-15 or more patients in a row treated with optimized procedure to be able to confirm approximate level of efficacy IMO.
floatinketucky wrote: The Study will consist of patients who will undergo two (2) PDT treatments employing 0.70 mg/cm^2 of TLD-1433 at Day 0 and Day 180.
https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT03945162?term=TLD-1433&draw=2&rank=1
ok we see who is listed to be included in the study.
In phase 1 study:
3 patients got .35 (half a dose) 100% CR AT 90 DAYS pr-November 8, 2017
3 patients got .70 (full dose) 67% CR AT 18 MONTHS
This is what I find interesting at least one dirty dozen phase 2 patients got 30 percent under treated or a 70 percent dose. Almost smack dab in the middle of the half dose and full dose.
Also the phase one study ended at 18 months so no further data was reported. Like the 24 month data...
You can expect the bean counters to be salavating over the 30 percent under treated data.
So if a patient didn't get (2) PDT treatments employing 0.70 mg/cm^2 of TLD-1433 at Day 0 and Day 180 then they really didn't qualify for the study.