Would you both agree that while, very promising, Direct trials impose a financial liability to the company that they may not be able to afford currently? I can imagine that this is the reason Direct trials haven’t started. Until they have revenue or a partner for this pathway, it will be difficult for them to move forward with Direct.
I look forward to getting some answers from this years ASM. Our small consortium of shareholders is anxious for data, but also tired of promises not kept. We’re in this for potential of the product. Many of us have experience in cancer care and the biology of cancer. We see potential here and have put our money behind that potential. Personally, my biggest fear is corruption in government regulation and the potential for the FDA and others to overlook positive data. There is BIG money in treatment status quo and those profits will be protected vehemently. Paying regulators to create approval obstacles could be the means of maintaining status quo. Right to try was supposed to offer relief to that, but hasn’t gotten off the ground yet.
Trials are risky not just for failure, but for exposure to regulators. Data acceptance isn’t always guaranteed. Poor drugs are frequently approved probably due to the businesses that support them, while better therapies are overlooked.
The end of this story is coming and it feels like a suspense novel.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
