I like others here share in cynical views. But, that said, I do see light.
My cynicism lies in the whole way that trials occur. Doctors, human beings on the forefront of
treating life ending diseases try to err on the side of good faith medicine. Partly due to
the constant threat of litigation, and partly because fear makes you conservative in your approach.
Peregrine has done very little to convince doctors that this line of treatment is more
likely to have a positive outcome than the treatments being put forward by other, larger, more reliable drug companies. Currently, the standard adjuvant chemotherapy uses gemcitabine (Gemzar) alone.
Gemcitabine is made by Eli Lilly. It's been the SOC for over 40 years. Who do you think gets first pick of the most treatable patients?
There is something to think about in the reality that big drug companies have the clout to get the most treatable patients for their trials, and the rest are left to companies like Peregrine. So in a
way I am not as disappointed as some here, because I feel that we showed a positive outcome on a very difficult treatment population.
I feel that because the MOA of Bavituximab is to stimulate the immune system, and that this does not necessarily occur overnight, that fast growing cancers may not be the best candidates for us in trials designed to "Knock our Socks off!"
So, I am giving us the benefit of the doubt. I believe we would have done better if we had been treating a population that was not at deaths gate with Liver failures, etc.
And last, I recognize that while we are testing Bavi, we are also developing more powerful versions,
and I think it's worth considering that Bavi in 10 years may be 100 times more powerful.
Whose to say?
