What would the trial design look like for looking visceral mets compared to the original trial design?
If there is a good overlap and the data is that good, then I would expect a lot of discussion with the FDA. Is there precedence for this type of approval?
Those are my questions.
So.... Is it possible to finagle a combo therapy to show OS improvement in respect to visceral metastases?
I'm not an expert on prostate cancers but the isn't the survival rate pretty high. By removing those that don't survive, how are the visceral metastases improved? IIt seems that visceral metastases would be a high concern.
You realize you're referring to WIlder as he is the one spoofing me. I agree with NO INTELLIGENCE as he's engaged in a childs game.
I think you should be worried about the genetically engineered mice with larger brains as they've recently replaced a key DNA sequence with human DNA to promote a larger brain in mice as discussed on "all things considered" on NPR titled "Just A Bit Of DNA Helps Explain Humans' Big Brains".
I think we might have a Pinky and the Brain situation on our hands if the mice can escape. NARF!
"heritable" was in a list of possibilities, not finite absolutes....
I also find it amazing that anyone that may be a doctor would defend a patently false statement of biology in a Seeking Alpha article.
This article: "Suppression of Tumor Invasion and Metastasis by Concurrent Inhibition of c-Met and VEGF Signaling in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors" Cancer Discovery Feb. 2012, explains how the c-met gets upregulated as a result of hypoxia due to vascular pruning as a result of VEGF treatments. This Intratumoral hypoxia can activate c-Met (To back that statement: . Bottaro DP, Liotta LA. Cancer: out of air is not out of action. Nature2003;423:593–5. AND. Pennacchietti S, Michieli P, Galluzzo M, Mazzone M, Giordano S,Comoglio PM. Hypoxia promotes invasive growth by transcriptional activation of the met protooncogene. Cancer Cell 2003;3:347–61.)
Thus, I find it utterly ridiculous that someone claiming to be a doctor would say that Cystic fibriosis is a genetic disease that renders people infertile proves that c-met is "mutation" when c-met upregulation from VEGF treatments are utterly proven to be a natural cellular response to the effects of VEGF treatments.
If you're a doctor, I hope you're using your real name because you deny biology and defend the absurd. I will stay clear of all doctors with your name.
People are born with Custic fibrosis, it's not a mutation that occurs because of treatment.
It does not support your defense of the article since it's a genetic disease.