Did you actually read what you posted? Quite a rationalization on the one year anniversary! I guess nothing learned, there is nothing wrong with Iclusig, nothing wrong with management's decisions regarding dosage in the past, it's FDA's fault, it's shorts' fault. LOL! Iclusig's safety issue was out there all of last year unless you buried your head in the sand, it didn't come out of blue all of sudden like AFFY's Omontys. I am sure at least in the back of your mind for the past year, you wished you had listened to "shorts" just for this one time.
If there is anything wrong with FDA's decision making, it shouldn't have granted Iclusig broad 2nd line label in the first place, later it simply took away what it shouldn't have granted based on clinical trial data submitted.
>> Therefore, it’s just doesn’t make sense at all for looking into a common dosage applied for all especially when dealing with those highly potent cancer drugs.
If that's the case, it is a COMPANY's responsibility to figure out whether one dose fits all or certain dose for some people while another dose for other people. You should blame them for not thinking of this solution in the first place!
