Plasticd - done some research on the OS values, and would have...

Plasticd - done some research on the OS values, and would have to agree that it is unlikely to be any data at the conference. Ignore my previous logic - maybe just wishful thinking.

Resection rates. An interesting one. The ANN had a p value of 0.857. I'm not well versed in P values, but my understanding is that this represents 86% chance of a random outcome. Thus the sample size is far too small to draw any meaningful conclusion.

Now the Complete Response rate in the liver showing a 200% improvement with a P value of 0.02 is I believe a very good result. 6% be itself is no great number, but a 200% improvement with a high statistical result must be excellent news for a patient. Any oncologist talking to a patient about various treatments would be negligent if they did not refer to this dramatic improvement in outcomes. IMO.

@6186. I mentioned ability of centres and interventional radiologists as a possible constraint .
Thinking a little more I don't see this as an issue for some years. There are about 300 centres in the US. If each centre did 4 treatments per week, then that would be ~60,000 doses per year. A nice problem to have