RE:RE:The difference between GLP and non-GLP To elaborate - the Q3 2020 Newsletter states an intention to commence human Trials in both indications only a year further on the so at that date the non-GLP Toxicology already completed for one of those indications must have been successful.
As they have since removed GBM from the pipeline the indication of the successful non-GLP toxicology completed before the Q3 2020 Newsletter will almost certainly have been NSCLC.
Why did they not proceed to GLP toxicology 18 months` ago after the success of non-GLP toxicology?
There is huge unmet need in the indications for which the Company suggests Rutherrin as suitable and if injectability is an issue there are other methods - one explicitly set out by RPCCC - for getting TLD-1433 (and why not Rutherrin?) into the lungs.