This ain't the first trial for idronoxil. There are clear historical goals they have to be bettered.
GK says it best in this regard in his blog march 2017
"We simply will be testing whether we can radio-sensitise the 1-2 tumours that are exposed to radiotherapy. In this case we will be using a low dose of radiation that would not be
expected to deliver anything more than partial shrinkage. We are expecting
complete remission of those exposed tumours. If this is all we achieve, then we will have achieved something highly significant and highly relevant in the field of cancer management.
The second shot is the bonus shot and that is to see whether we get an abscopal response in all non-irradiated tumours.
Now Check the patient ID numbers and look at their base PSA and follow through with the latest read out yesterday.
https://www.noxopharm.com/site/PDF/...ientswithCRPCaPhase1safetyanddosefindingstudyDo the maths and why the patients numbers go to 14 and yet only 11 available for data. Three have died on 800 dose, and were replaced with two new patients. And check out the base line PSA of the first groups compared the last cohort. Just saying, because in Oct they changed the criteria from line 1 to line 2 and study investigator Ian Minns left. replace by Isabell Vocks who in another month would leave and be replace with the third trial offices Marinella Messina.
- At least two lesions, one of which is measurable and one which is suitable for radiation therapy
Replace with.... - At least one symptomatic lesion which is suitable for radiation therapy
Changing study officials, changing criteria and still all that is seen is what palliative care was "
expected to deliver anything more than partial shrinkage" . And that is not early days or promising encouraging results, that is inevitable sound of history repeating, what most already know.
