It's strange how a trial with exactly 23 patients keeps popping up everywhere. And I wonder if they are all one and the same trial. Results from such a study (or studies) have been used to assert that mes do particularly well, and that use of poly-ICLC improves outcomes.
I have to say I can't see that the FDA would grant anything on the basis of blinded data from a randomized trial, whereas they can and do grant approvals based on open label single arm P2's (or even P1's..)
I think we may be forgetting RMAT, which can lead to AA, and which can be confirmed through following patient registries rather than through a P4 confirmation trial. Though that is looking like a longshot now.
In any event LP being LP, will follow a road less travelled!
Senti, thanks for sharing your thoughts - it will help me begin to understand where some of you are coming from so I can at least follow the conversation and start to form a better picture of these issues.