Application, page-23

Denial, good summary, in addition we also have discussed Stem Cell treatments previously here at PAR HC. In addition, in the past at least, it was found to be slightly hit and miss depending on the individual, it was also 9and still is) expensive (as Denial suggests) and there were some inconsistencies. Though Edski1's reports (thanks Edski1) do seem to show a higher level of consistency and a high percentage of successful pain reduction albeit with small numbers of patients.

Another comparative to us is that we have shown some evidence of regression of BMEL, the Stem cell treatment didn't show that, here is a quote from the same report:

"Although patients receiving SVF injections had significantly better knee function, MRI review revealed no changes in modified Outerbridge classifications over time and no differences in the changes in chondral thickness between groups. However, it should be noted that the mean change in cartilage thickness (anteroposterior dimension) for all groups was less than the resolution of the MRI measurement".


Definitely both areas need further investigation and no doubt the read outs of both at the conclusion of Phase Three trials will document and will shine the appropriate light on the two different treatments. The market of OA is vast and yes we need to keep an eye out on the competitors but even if both treatments show promising results finally there is room for much revenue in my view.

Finally there are a multitude of possible other indications we could address including inflammatory type conditions along with pain (action of NGF).
This needs to be taken into consideration but as Denial also says, need to keep an eye out on who is doing what and how it might affect us may be some time (a long time?) into the future.