Any idea whether the data published by OCAT in the October Lancet is as good or better, albeit for the precursor to wet AMD, namely dry AMD? Probably apples and oranges, I know.
AAVL—Of all the issues to pop-up out of the trial, safety isn't on my list. Subretinal injection is fine, little to go wrong with skilled personnel carrying out the vitrectomy.
I respect your knowledge of the company’s technology, but I’m not fully convinced that a safety issue can be ruled out. Inasmuch as VA improved (modestly), it seems strained to assert that the increased retinal thickness in the AVA-101 arm was surely a consequence of natural disease progression and not something more sinister. Regards, Dew