|
Rebecca said: "And I'm sure most of us would agree that if the SAME benefit could be gotten for less treatment (time, money. etc.), that would be a good thing. They are not saying that however, they are just saying it would be more cost-effective."
Actually, I think that's pretty much exactly what the FINher trial said. If memory serves (which it often does not, alas), results for the shortened duration actually seemed not just equal, but better. But the trial was small, and comparison of less vs. more was not head-to-head, so more research is needed. Certainly Genentech has no interest in a trial that might show that it's as good or better to use less of their very profitable drug. So as others have said, this trial would have to be driven by countries who are looking not just at effectiveness, but at responsible use of limited resources (stewardship) as well.
Debbie Laxague
|