Is the "100% effective against solid tumors" cancer pill AOH1996 paper legit? [see description]

Twitter threads

First tweet of last thread: "Small molecule oral cancer drug kills 100% of solid tumors across 70 evaluated cancer types in vitro and in animal models with a therapeutic index of 6 and no discernible side effects".

Name of the paper "Small molecule targeting of transcription replication conflict for selective chemotherapy". Link to paper in the Twitter threads. Twitter search: https://twitter.com/search?q=AOH1996

Resolves YES if Phase II human clinical trials are conclusive. "Conclusive" according to the scientific consensus at the time of publication of the Phase II human clinical trials results. As I'm no doctor, I will have to rely on this. If there's no consensus, I may put an arbitrary threshold such as 70% efficacy against 50 types of cancers, as I don't expect 100% efficacy on all cancer types in human trials, and as that would validate the drug's mechanism of effect anyway.

Resolves NO if Phase II human clinical trials are inconclusive, or earlier if research fraud or errors such as huge in vitro results misinterpretations are revealed.

Resolution set arbitrarily at the end of 2028 because Phase I human clinical trials started in October 2022 and last two years. No indication yet of the duration of Phase II trials. End of 2028 is already a somewhat optimistic date for the end of Phase II trials. But such trials can be shortened when drugs show exceptional efficacy in life-threatening conditions, such as with Imatinib, sold as Gleevec/Glivec. I may delay the resolution of the market if acceptable reasons for delays in the clinical trials are given. If other researchers/doctors accept the reasons given for delay, then it's acceptable. If they don't, if they suspect something fishy, eg unfavorable results, then market resolves NO. If there's no consensus, market is extended.

I won't trade in this market for objectivity.

People are also trading

Related questions