biomaven, wondering what you think about the idea the company floated last week to use the confirmatory study to run a head to head trial with gleevec? If ponatinib is able to demonstrate an improved molecular response rate over gleevec, do you think it may allow the company to make the case that high risk pts should start on pona or, at the very least, position pona more competitively in the 2nd line vis-a-vis sprycel/tasigna? Since sprycel/tasigna have both run 1st line CP trials vs gleevec, running a similar trial indirectly allows a comparison between pona and sprycel/tasigna without immediately running the head to head, mult-arm trial that will be needed down the road.
