It is very common to use, and therefore to test, various drugs...

It is very common to use, and therefore to test, various drugs in combination, seeking greater efficacy.

Plenty of treatments of that kind have been commercialised, but still better combinations are sought.

For example, interferon is a useful substance, but one with undesirable side effects which effects even detract from uptake of treatments which include it.

It seems to me that BLT's own business focus on cancer-related pain may be overtaken by the events occurring in combination treatments and vaccines being trialled by others who incorporate BLT substances.

Their HIV results were apparently excellent and yet BLT shies from actively pursuing this area - I guess because HIV treatments, or cures, have proven elusive and expensive and they are a small company.

On the other hand, they work acively on Hep B, seeking a cure, and from that work, some potential Hep C outcomes may be derived.

Researchers in that field want a combination where interferon ceases to be a component and which works more effectively on the genotypes on which it is relatively ineffective.

BLT's gene silencing seems to be a productive path to follow in that respect and if a combination without interferon is effective, the sky is the limit.

In the most recent announcement, I found it quite striking that the vaccine containing BLT's product resulted in measurable positive effect on patients, when the primary purpose of phase 1 trial is to demonstrate safety.

It seems logical to me that others involved in cancer vaccine work may see it as worthwhile to splosh in a few drops of BLT product to see if attacking the disease 'efficacy' proves useful in support of their primary active ingredients.