That is true but still it doesn't contradict my claims which is well known to the medical community. Vbl need to know the facts about their drug and avastin and I hope I m wrong but it looks like they don't know how to design the trials. Many mistakes ...another example is changing treatment in progression ...they know their drug is not good at stopping progression so why to determine changes in treatment upon progression...moreover they know it takes time for the drug to work so why not to change treatment after 4 shots of vb111 even if there is progression. Another example they see only 50% of patients react with fever and they live double the time patients without fever lives. Actually non fever live avastin time so I believe there is almost zero benefit from the antiangiogenesis other words u see that..wont u stop and think moment maybe if we treat a soup of many types of viruses isn't it going to raise fever response? Of course it will...instead they go for car-t treat except of improving the already working drug vb111. Anyway I look at it any direction I see huge mistakes and stupidity sorry marketing...decisions ...technology...design of trial...
I m not against avastin . I just say one arm get avastin and one arm gets vb111 mono without avastin. I m against mixing the 2. This is a huge mistake to mix their working drug with a non working one which is not inert but influence vb111 activity disturbing it from creating durable complete response. This is why all durable cr were in vb111 mono and This is why u won't see even 1 durable cr in the ph3.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
