I know I am responding to you directly KB, but this intended...

I know I am responding to you directly KB, but this intended more generally: the Israel data is a bit meh for me.

At this point in time, with my small Neanderthal brain, I don't think the data generated will be very attractive to pharma, and I don't think I would be making any investment decisions based on it. This relates specifically to the dose escalation phase and even the expansion. Sure, we could get a CR or even some PR's, but we already know the drug works. And if there are no responses, it won't really mean much to me. This is because the best way to describe this trial is putting a blindfold on and throwing darts (Zantrene) at a dartboard (Patients). We know Zantrene requires a specific patient population. Sure, the team can do a post-hoc biochemical analysis of the patient's tumors that responded, which would give some understanding of why there was a response, but this hardly is demonstrating the 'process' that I have been talking about and that big pharma will want to see.

What I really want to see from a trial is the following:
- Companion diagnostic developed by RAC used to effectively screen participants and select those most likely to respond
- A selection of patients with solid tumors (as opposed to blood tumors) (this is the major limitation I have found with the historic data)
- Peripheral IV formulation of Zantrene developed by RAC (I think the oral formulation is a little while off yet) used either as a single agent and/or in combination with another drug
- Patient responses to the drug are logged, and there are clear links to the companion diagnostic data

This kind of trial demonstrates the full sweep of IP that RAC owns and/or have developed to take Zantrene from a cool drug to a multi-billion dollar asset. If you want Zantrene, you'll have to buy the IP to our companion diagnostic as we as our IV formulation.