RE:RE:RE:Small correction to tableThat sounds reasonable. With fewer treatments and superior safety numbers even similar CR numbers should be enough. We all keep saying that the numbers should continue to improve and eclipse ALL other treatments so maybe the 'delay' is waiting for that to be confirmed? The under treatment error continues to haunt us from a time standpoint and seems like the FDA wants it proven that was a just a blip.
enriquesuave wrote: Could the FDA be considering to give AA for Ruvidar? BTD is often given after much less data than we already have. I'm not expecting AA right away, but who know? As long as we get BTD and a path to AA.