Share
4,194 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 5493
clock Created with Sketch.
19/12/21
15:47
Share
Originally posted by dachopper:
↑
Probably, IMO MSB caught the FDA off guard and they were not prepared to approve any MSC based treatments at that point. They were still drafting MSC potency guidelines at the time MSB were pitching for approval..... as MJC73 mentioned. So the question now becomes....... if OTAT agree, what % chance is there of full FDA approval? Or will the FDA go against both OTAT and ODAC recommendations and halt stem cell approvals for everyone even longer? Either case, this is MSB's chance to pull a rabbit out of the hat. Everyone was in shock the first time around when FDA did not approve, remember the comments and conviction from Silviu and Fred at the time, and how convinced the company was and still is that they would not be doing or not require a randomized placebo double blind trial in children.....plenty of people have been throwing shade ever since then, claiming that the FDA have irriversibly demanded another blinded trial in children - and how it absolutely must occur.......and how the product will never, ever be approved without it.....the current share price reflects this in my opinion.... it is reflective of nothing but hope of a possible future, but no approvals of anything are factored in. Remember the company are STILL saying that Remestemcell is closest to market by a definate margin. They are 100% laser focussed on getting it to market, not on the day trading share price. I'm willing to bet there will be a massive upside if OTAT agree with the manufacturing and CMC Bar that MSB will set in the field of Allogenic stem cell treatments. The logical follow on sequence will be BLA resubmission for Ryoncil, Phase 3 Covid ARDS trial initiation, and I am sure the lessons learnt from the OTAT in Remestemcell although not directly applicable, the lessons learnt will guide the way for the next gen product manufacturing and provide a less bumpy path to approval when the time comes for them also.... We are approaching the nexus point..... Novartis was simply a potential cash cow, MSB have gotten to the position they are in now, by themselves. The results are still the same, and yes - peer reviewed post HOC data looks even more supporting of approval now than it ded before they went for approval the first time..... 10% survival in the majic cohort that represented the most fatal outcome... Same cohort in MSB trial had over 60% survival ( almost half of the trail participant numbers ). Even if you don't look that deep into post hoc fields - they still achieved the primary end point, and proved it reduced mortality in the entire co-hort...... The shade throwers continue to falsely claim it doesn't work.... read this again 50 times that was released by peer review.... "10% survival in the majic cohort that represented the most fatal outcome... Same cohort in MSB trial had over 60% survival"
Expand
MAP levels ≥0.291 were present in 48% of remestemcel-L treated children (12/25) and 37% of the MAGIC cohort (10/27). Treatment with remestemcel-L resulted in 67% Day 28 Overall Response and 64% Day 180 overall survival compared with 10% Day 28 Overall Response and 10% Day 180 survival in the MAGIC cohort (both p=0.01) when treated with various biologics, including ruxolitinib. Not only is that a better result than the initial topline data reveals..... It also shows that 48% of MSB trial were in this expected 90% mortality group, whereas only 37% of the Magic controls had the disease to that level of severity. Meaning if the control group were actually matched based on this expected disease severity Magic score..... then the mortality benefit and the P values would have been even higher yet, and far exceed the primary end point higher than they did already...