News Focus
News Focus
icon url

seekinganswers

11/30/25 5:43 PM

#800297 RE: learningcurve2020 #800290

You said "dead on arrival" , not me. I said "invalid".
MHRA got quite a bit of money to evaluate this application, and they have done so. Like you posted earlier, they need money. They never guaranteed that by accepting the application, they would automatically approve it.
Did you think the MHRA was going to turn down all that revenue in advance?
If you file for any permit, you pay the fees up front. They don't tell you not to file based on what they think, they just approve or deny based on the subsequent review. How do you think they pay their salaries? You don't know half of what you think you know. 😉

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) charges fees for Marketing Authorisation Applications (MAAs) based on the type of application, with a standard "major national fee" applying to new active substances—typical for innovative cancer drugs (e.g., oncology products with novel mechanisms). This fee is £124,194 for applications
icon url

AllSheWrote

11/30/25 6:05 PM

#800304 RE: learningcurve2020 #800290

I did not say the MHRA declared it dead on arrival. I said the results submitted are scientifically invalid. The MHRA took the application and gave it a thorough review, as they would any application. Then, after concluding the review, they told the company that the trial results are flawed for multiple reasons and cannot be approved as submitted, so the company needs to correct those flaws. That's where we are.