Talk:Evofosfamide

Pharmacology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Evofosfamide.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

EMDSerono (talk · contribs)
LamasUI (talk · contribs)

various problems

Collaboration - typo - eVofosfamide. Mechanism of prodrug activation - NADPH cytochrome P450 should presumably be NADPH cytochrome P450 reductase (but check if that is only a 2-electron reductase). Formulation - what is WFI? For clarity I suggest changing "DEHP" to "DEHP plasticizer" (but is this sentence too specialized to be worth including?) Clinical trials - is it worth including all this detail? A much briefer summary might be better. NCT01144455 - Interventions - TH-302 is listed twice. NCT00742963 - why is progression free survival different (6.7 or 6.5) for what appears to be the same group of subjects? NCT01440088 - typo - analyses haVE NCT01522872 - Interventions - TH-302 is listed twice; dexamethasone isn't listed. NCT01403619 - How can the study be recruiting if it has reported results?

             Interventions only lists TH-302 & placebo but Results lists bevacizumab/TH-302 combionation therapy.
             Why does PFS differ (3.1 or 2.8)?

NCT01721941 - Intervention - Phase I is not a drug. Soft tissue sarcoma - delete , after Both.

                     delete trial after (TH-CR-403).

Metastatic pancreatic cancer - delete , after Both. Drug development risks - Given that "Merck will not apply for a license" this section should probably be deleted. Typo - payors dependS upon 69.72.92.70 (talk) 01:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Drug development risks section may as well be deleted

It could as well apply to every drug in development - Adds almost nothing to this article - If the risks are different than other drugs then could just highlight the differences. Ironic that trial failure (as seems to have happened) was not identified as a risk. May as well delete entire section ? or reduce to 1 line if there is anything significant ? - Rod57 (talk) 01:49, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]