In conclusion, literature data provide sufficient information to support the efficacy and the safety of Gemcitabine in ovarian cancer treatment. Gemcitabine has been shown to have a significant activity with an acceptable toxicity profile in previously treated ovarian cancer patients as a single agent or in combination with other drugs.
I’m sure what Krone was saying probably fits the bill, saying that Dilly said they had a nice Chk1 in their back pocket, Not the front pocket!
When they are ready too do something with it they will, and will be able too see that from a trial application Krone would usually find something and this site is always ahead of itself with this or that is happening, haven’t seen a clear sign yet but the 6-7% fund is a sign maybe, but something more conclusive would be better!
So maybe the reason for the delay of half year results could be that they would probably had too mention that they have issues of some kind but too do with supply/manufacture/formulation of 1801 and this would delay the Trials Application as these would have too be complete another few weeks grace might be all they need, still speculation until it’s relayed from them though!
That’s correct timeline’s as per the AGM statement RNS in December 2019!
“These data suggest that in SDC-1802 Sareum has a potent, orally-available, small molecule contributor to the immune-oncology field, which could prove advantageous over the biological approaches that currently dominate. Subject to successful progress and financing, human trials are targeted to start in late-2020.”
SDC-1802 is a better more selective molecule you can see that in the Patents and pharmacology profile plus it’s got the poster presentation against other immunotherapy’s and only one in Solid Cancer but the patent has to be resolved for T-ALL as it’s got final rejection but can still be attained imo with more time and work!
Ok Basser that’s good with me, I I’m allowed too not like one out of 3 compounds and disclose why when asked by fellow poster Ahfam why, and I don’t mind being wrong if you tell me why I’m wrong and agree when such happens!
But if posters make wild claims then I’m going to ask for evidence why!
So let me put this into context I post my opinions why I’m not too fond of 1801 with prove of why and the chemical structure with selectivity’s!
But I’m at it and get people who spell check posts and have ulterior motives!
Another poster posts that Sareum has Master Patents so other companys can’t patent catalytic Tyk2’s and when asked to further the conversation say it contravenes Sareum Patents and it’s all there if you can be arsed too look!
Did everyone take up the offer, I would be more concerned with other posters motives!
Only one other person on the site is questioning such!