BK provided a paper which answers your question. Did you even read the paper before asking? You cannot just use a simple equation to find the HED. If you can find a scientific paper saying otherwise, please show us.
From a 2009 paper: "Simple scaling of drug doses can be misleading for some drugs; correction for protein binding, physicochemical properties of the drug or species differences in physiological time can improve scaling. However, differences in drug transport and metabolism, and in the dose–response relationship, can override the effect of size alone." I've bolded the main points.
Keep repeating your assumptions does not make a fact. On the other hand, confirmation of p21 at higher doses, stabilization of the CA-125 marker, decrease of the DEA marker, current dosage much higher than the expected efficacy range, planned phase 2/3 trials as a SINGLE AGENT, these are FACTS.
I think BK has clearly demonstrated that your argument is not valid. He has shed some light on the fact that the doses used in pre-clinical studies cannot be easily converted to the doses required in clinical studies to reach efficacy as you originally claimed. Therefore, the fact that the doses used in the pre-clinical studies are different from the doses currently used in the clinical trial is not relevant since they cannot be easily compared with your method.
Do you still claim that Dr Menon was wrong when he mentioned that 200mg/m2 is probably in the efficacy range ?