yes agreed RP they are expecting to hear more second quarter on other works...
we know GBM Agile runs over a couple of years and drugs will come and go on their own branches during that time and any interesting avenues or combinations explored in an agile way through that period if there is a hint of benefit - it’s that agility which makes it quicker and more cost effective to a better outcome and they share a common control group amortising the costs of that branch across all trial partners.
So given this flexibility and the up coming reports from the other trials - news could in effect drop at any time during the trial period / it’s not a wait until the end scenario as in the past.
The point of GBM Agile is flexibility and resources applied in the right way, at the right time, with progress and direction reported and adjusted along the way in trial in smaller sprints - rather than waiting until the end, reporting, redesigning another trial, etc. So going into GBM Agile is not a come back in two years or value added at the end in two years affair.
Agile process’ as the term informs - agility - is flexible and builds value through the entire process and as it progress’ so risks diminish. You either stop in the trial at a time you see a compound is not working, you don’t go to the end and by definition of completion you have a working compound (rather than completing a trial even if it does not look good and then assessing data as in the past - and then reporting if your drug works)
Effectively you are already weeded out of the trial as early as possible in time saving money better spent elsewhere.but we have concrete evidence! So this is about beefing up the numbers - if as has been suggested results are slightly better than earlier reported because we now have a settled dose and the next cohort supports or betters this earlier data - then this trial provides the trial patient numbers very quickly and who knows we might discover an amazing drug combination on top of this - it’s a really exciting trial structure/process.
Its been noted that clinician control the trial - it would not be ‘agile’ if they did not... it would be externally directed and that’s not ‘agile’
