Biotech Values

[iwfal]

GERN -

Are you still skeptical about the CR's?

If you asking who was correct in their interpretation of the PR from 1 month ago then the answer is probably that the sceptics were. 1 month ago there were 4 "CR"s that you and other bulls believed to be full CRs and that everyone else believed to be references to non-clinical CRs.

Now, in the full write up, where there is no excuse for ambiguity, there is only mention of 3 CRs (which are (simplistically) either spleen-less patients or patients that had all aspects of CR including clinical response). The implication is that at least 1 of the "CR"s of one month ago was only a blood CR without clinical CR characteristics.

(Note that I used the word probably because they could have re-assessed a CR and re-catagorized it, but so far as I know MF doesn't require confirmation in the same way as RECIST. So this seems not hugely likely.)

That said, perhaps you lost the battle, but you won the war. The spleen responses are pretty good and likely to get better. And, of course the bone/blood responses are in a class by themselves (which is no surprise after the PR of one month ago).