RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Huge Global Blood Cancer MarketIf our trial results remain good and durability of response remains high, it's difficult to understand how urologists could defend
not using Ruvidar PDT once it's approved.
Conservatively, one third of patients treated will be completely cured of
NMIBC after only one or two treatments without any serious adverse effects attributable to the treatment. And maybe more than one third.
It seems to me that most urologists would want to try this first. If it works after 1 or 2 treatments - mission accomplished. If their patients don't have a complete response or suffer recurrence they can always try one of the other more "treatment intensive" solutions.
Our
Ruvidar PDT ACT may be widely adopted by urologists as this kind of treatment is in their wheelhouse and is both effective and safe. As
Dr. Kulkarni said:
"...I think one of the advantages here is it is a urologist run therapy. Urologists are comfortable going to the OR and treating patients cystoscopically or endoscopically. It's a single treatment. So that's very appealing. And if patients are doing well, there's a maintenance treatment at six months..." charlierock wrote: No complexity. Nothing to see here. It's more like simplicity relativity speaking. My main concerns are; is BTD coming our way soon without anymore hurdles? How widely will our ACT be adopted? How bout a nice big joint venture or ventures. I think this is the year when we'll get some answers and maybe some surprises.