RE:RE:Durable Response As TLT moves further into this study 2, I hope they focus more on the optimized patient data. To show the world what 1433/Rutherin is really capable of...
CancerSlayer wrote:
Thanks Eoganacht...
Here's a comparison looking at 450 day data for all 41 patients (including the 3 from Ph 1b) & the first 20 treated in Ph 2:
450 Days (41 patients) 450 Days (first 20 treated)
CR 5 5
PR 2
NR 15
Pending 19
Total 41
Note: In looking at the 41 patient 450 day data, 2 of the 5 CRs would have come from Ph 1b, which leaves 3 from Ph 2. Even though there were 3 CRs at 90 days from the first under-dosed 12, it is impossible based on the 450 day CR data as presented (5 CRs in each group) for any of those 3 (1 to 3) to have maintained a CR at 450 days without affecting the 450 day CR data of the first 20 treated as presented. Whether you use 1, 2 or 3 CRs from the first 12, if you are to reconcile the 5 CRs in each group, the 450 day data from the first 20 treated would have to equal 3 of 20 (not 5 of 20, or 25% as presented in the MD&A chart). So, my interpretation of the above suggests that all 5 CRs for both groups represent only the fully optimized patients (those who received two optimized treatments). Since 8 of the first 20 treated were fully optimized, this would equate to 5 of 8 CRs (63% CR) at 450 days for the fully optimized group of the first 20. JMO...& just trying to make sense of some of the data & get a better idea of the impact of optimization.