Thompson on...Clinical Development Strategy
3 very small Cdn trials “We consider those to be “Proof of concept” studies.” (that still aren’t done 5 years after starting on this ‘proof of concept’ “strategy”)
man these guys are good (at spinning in circles.)
current “strategy”
focuses on a number of parallel studies featuring
Different modes of delivery, (3 different modes)
different scheduling,
different ah, dosing,
ah different indications,
and monotherapy vs combo (radio & chemo) therapy
doing all that simultaneously
Primary reason for that is…
“Huge amount of interrelationship between responses seen in these studies & we really, there is a huge amount of crossover and so uh, this is “more prudent for us to do them all at the same time.”
Taking his comments at face value, the reason for doing these studies all at the same time is because they are seeing a huge amount of interrelationship between responses in these studies.
Does the logic of that comment make any sense? It seems there is something more there, but not surprising his answer leaves us wanting.
No further expansion on why exactly it is more prudent? Like we finally have to get off our a$$ and do something?
Re: large volume of nci work
“I’m amazed at how many people have actually done combination therapy studies, with actually not having done the pre-clinical work, which is surprising, but, ah, we’re not doing that.”
Again, is he taking a shot at all the other companies that jump right into combo therapy studies without doing pre-clinical work, or is he just giving another excuse for taking so long, or both?
in all of the above, it sounded like he wanted to deviate from his monotone drone and perhaps say something more, but then retreated back to his shell.
perhaps he is just downplaying things so his message board flunkies can do the pumping for him?
if this treatment is effective (and he should know better than anyone), why isn't he more excited, especially now that they finally have credible US based trials?
perhaps he's rightfully worried about his relationship with BIOEYE et al and facing some tough questions at the AGM?