RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:88% demonstrate that CR at 180 days, 69% at 270 days Enrique, I am very encouraged. What would
really get me going is if we start to see some PR after first dose convert to CR after second dose. THAT would be huge! IMO... It would show the market that trying 1433 again is a great idea if it doesn't work the first time.
enriquesuave wrote: Actually numbers were better for evaluable patients at 180 days (50% CR)vs (46% CR)at 90 days. That is 109% (not 88%). They are being conservative. That is why I'm waiting to see numbers at 270 days which could foretell 360 and 450 days on Optimized patients. 270 days is steady at 39% CR meaning no new data in last month. Next update will show what a second treatment can do in Optimized patients who were NR or PR at 180 days. In the new MD& A released today, the 1st 20 patients chart with all assessments completed shows very good numbers and these include the 1st 12 non-Optimized. If BTD is granted, which it definitely should IMO, and we show consistent data or even better, on a few more patients ( all Optimized) , then AA is next. IMHO.
FGPstock wrote:
I think you guys may be reading this statement wrong. 46% were CR after 90 days. then 88% of the 46% were still CR after 180.
Not sure how the PR factors in
For all Evaluable Patients, who achieved a CR at 90 days, 88% demonstrate that CR at 180 days, 69% at 270 days, 50% at 360 days and 56% at 450 days, demonstrating a strong duration of complete response.