My guess here is that the positive interim results from the...

My guess here is that the positive interim results from the burns trial have been the incentive and rationale behind the decision to rapidly evaluate R327 for diabetic foot ulcers. The acceptance of those as yet unpublished and unreported results by the ethics committee probably supports that idea.

"... Principal Investigator, Professor Dickson said “The research indicates that RECCE® 327 may be effective in treating patients with diabetic foot infections. The team hopes that its early promise is fulfilled in this study in our patients.” ..."

"... Ethics approval for this clinical trial is confirmation that the Company has completed the necessary pre-clinical safety and efficacy testing of R327 required to commence human clinical trials and runs in addition to its other ongoing clinical trials. Investigators will review the study data for clinical efficacy and toxicity before deciding to expand the trial to assess the compound’s efficacy against the current best standards of care..."

I very much like the last sentence here: "... before deciding to expand the trial to assess the compound’s efficacy against the current best standards of care. " In other words, if it fulfils its early promise it will be evaluated as a potential alternative to the current best standard of care. If it succeeds in the trial then there is a huge market for the product!

"... The Company is exploring R327 as a preventative treatment for DFI, as studies in the United States have shown between 14-24% percent of patients with diabetes who develop a foot ulcer will require an amputation, and foot ulceration precedes 85% of diabetes-related amputations (1). Moreover, the total medical costs for treating diabetic foot diseases in the United States is US $9-13 billion every year (2). ..."