competitor does not cut the mustard, page-5

Hi Hector,

Not sure if you are aware but Prochymal has proven to be ineffective for a number of trials , including;
graft-versus-host disease, knee cartilage repair, Crohn's disease ( related to Bone Marrow transplants); heart attack and now diabetes.

IMO, Mesobalast can be differentiated from Osiris by :

(a) The depth of the pre-cinical trials conducted by MSB Before they proceed to Clinical;
(b) Osiris's platform technology is based on mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) where as Mesoblast uses the earliest and rarest progenitor stem cell found in the adult called a Mesenchymal Precursor Cell (MPCs)
(c) Based on the above Mesoblast’s technology positively selects for a starting population of MPCs which is more than 1000-fold purer than that of its competitors ( see MSB website)

In my view, the above partly explains why MSB has to date two(2) Statistically significant outcomes:-

>>Bone Marrow Translants - Phase III
>>Congestive Heart Failure - Phase II

I think your comment is fair enough comment but what also needs to be noted is that unfortunately for Osiris there havent been any notable ( Statiscically significant) Phase II outcomes to date.

The above is IMO only.

Cheers