This isn't the first time anyone has done a clinical trial for an oncology drug.
Generally phase 1s are designed to find a safe dose, phase 2 is dose optimization, and phase 3 is designed to show statistically significant efficacy and safety. Drugs fail at a lot of different points.
Some drugs show a lot of promise in phase 1 and skip straight to phase 3 only to fail miserably. I'm sure there are drugs that received accelerated approval and then were pulled off the market.
The point being, it's a lot of guesswork along the way. What isn't guesswork: No one stops after phase 1 because the drug didn't cure cancer in phase 1.
I'm sure Kevetrin is showing signs of efficacy that warrant further trials, a lot of drugs do and still fail.
About the only thing we know for sure is that one metastatic lesion disappeared and p21 was elevated by up to ~200%. Given only that information, e.g. assuming no other lesions disappeared, I think it's safe to say that Kevetrin needs to improve if it ever wants to go to market. That improvement can come from a lot of things, namely dose optimization (increasing dosage and frequency) and combinations with other drugs. We're much better positioned now than 2 years ago to start exploring the true potential of K. In regards to the ~200% p21 elevation, other drugs have achieved 11-fold increases in p21, at least in mice, so a bit of perspective is always necessary.
As for the ovarian cancer trial, it could just be the combination of it being an orphan target and Kevetrin showing relative promise in treating it, we still need to learn more before we're anywhere close to guarantees here.
I consider the chance of Kevetrin working well and resulting in a 10x or higher return for investors at less than 90%. Anyone sane would even if they won't admit it, otherwise they'd be pouring literally all of their money into CTIX.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
