I'll confess neglect
on this and after they messed up a reported
p-value it may be worth doing.
I have to admit that for all my complaining about
"managements" I don't usually check their math.
I think the issue here however is not yet the
math- CD54 just means " I want something to
cling to." It doesn't mean, " I want to stimulate
or kill." For example, if you are a preaching
tolerance, you may want to talk with suppressor
cells rather than helpers. If they could show
the cd54 upreg in placebo patients and show
that the survival benefit only survives when you
actually reinfuse the upregged cells, then I
would be proven wrong but I haven't seen that yet.
Given the concerns that DC's tolerize as often as provoke,
you'd think they would be a little concerned about distinguishing the cases more clearly.
If you are looking for something interesting, COR
may be worth a look at chemistry. "They" ( as rendered
on a message board ) are claiming a novel histology
( reproducible ) after high-dose cx-717 treatment.
I'm not suggesting it would be a good bottom fishing
idea but if you can get some insight into this you
may have a head start on other small molecule CNS efforts
( insomnia, all the COR markets, etc).
