xoma back to deal with bacteria? surprise!, bpi is anti bacteria. Good that the focus is back to antibiotic, not blood replacement therapy.
xoma mismanagement, naivette and/or manipulation ended it in the trauma debacle.
Check trauma pII, only about 1 in 20 subjects have proven blood culture bacteria (4% to 8%).
How does xoma pretend fixing trauma problems with bpi if only 1 in 20 has bacteria problems? naive?
xoma measure lps (xoma owns a lot of the diagnostics aspects of lps measurement) in meningo pII, but failed to do so in trauma pII, or at least is not in the full article publication.
If the hypothesis was bacteria or pieces of bacteria coming from the bowels then how does xoma failed to measure lps? miscalculation?
If bacteria translocation was the hypothesis, xoma must have measure lps, and see if those patients fair better with bpi, why did xoma fail to do so?
Why xoma did not focus in penetrating injuries, proven bacteremia or at least proven high lps levels?
Blood loss replacement placebo group/bpi group was 5 to 6 units respectively in first 24 hours, and 9 to 8 units respectively overall.
Credits to xoma for courage for trying with severely sick patients, it shows believe in the hypothesis, and honesty in clinical research (still naive and mismanagement apply).
Trauma indication is dead. xoma best interest is to forget it, and delay results for years (at least here I agree with xoma).
Focus on meningo, sepsis, resistant bugs, cystic fybrosis (infections).... and hu1124/psoriasis.
The rest is preclinical, many, many years far away.
Happy turkey 2 |
