RE:RE:RE:RE:Nothing like some 'leaks' on the FDA Resubmission The actual issue is that they never tell us what's in the fire or why things are not in the fire or why things are being considered for the fire. We get nothing but verbal diarrhea or a lack thereof.
Wino115 wrote: I also wonder if they can't get more cancer research grants for govt to UQAM to do a lot of this early stuff. It was interesting to see that two of the three AACR posters were based on UQAM research, including the Cold to Hot tumor studies. Those $2mil grants have helped beyond the original breast cancer work. Maybe they can use a grant from that breast cancer focused group to do either a small human-focused TNBC and HER2- trial and something around the anti-metastatic pre/post treatment with 20 or so patients.
Breast, like many, is often about better control of metastices to at least add another year or more to survival. If they can get those grants to pay for most of it, that would be another great move to pursue now. They need to be creative and maybe if you specifiy in a re-enrolled trial you'll make sure to do 10 breast cancer patients they can get half of it paid for by outside money. I've never seen anything from 1a/b released specifically about a breast cancer patient which given the high-sort1 levels in tissue is surprising. They need to get more irons in the fire, so to speak, to highlight potential value in there.