Thank you for your answers. I jumped the gun when I posted prior post. I am not eligible for this trial.
My fingers are not bent. After reading other posts on this forum, it seems I am at the stage where one seeks radiation. Thank you again, it is nice to know there are people out there who are ready and willing to share their information with me.

Gary

The double blind study will administer Xiaflex/placebo in a 2:1 ratio - in other words, two thirds of the participants will receive the actual drug and only one-third the placebo. Those given the placebo will be eligible for a follow-up open label study in which everyone will receive Xiaflex.

There is a separate, somewhat larger, open label study which will be conducted concurrently in which all participants will receive the actual drug.

I've been preliminarily accepted for one of the studies though I don't know which one as of yet. I'm scheduled to go in for the preliminary physical and medical exam on November 8. Assuming I pass and am formally accepted, I'll post my experiences and results.

I was -really- dreading surgery and the nearest NA physician is 300 miles away. This certainly looks like the preferable alternative.

Congratulation Sven! Where did you get your collagenase?

Wolfgang

Long term this will probably be a superior treatment to NA. NA involves only incisions in the tissue so it has limited benefits in terms of total flexibility and use of the hand. The collagenase injection should be able to travel to surrounding tissue and provide both greater loosening initially and a longer interval between treatments.

I would still bet that it will not be available to the general public until 2010 as the manufacturer needs to be able to produce the product in quantity which has been the principal stumbling block for many years.

Collegenase will also be *far* more expensive than NA. Most MCP corrections are quite simple and NA should do as good a job as Collegenase. It's the PIP where Collegenase may prove to shine over NA.

I'd like to see NA far more accepted than it is today before Collegenase hits the road. The marketing to the CHSs will be extensive and those not trained in NA by that time never will be. They'll just take the easy route and use the far more expensive Collegenase. It will be one more example of unnecessary medical cost.

I'd love to see a long term study pitting NA against Collegenase. That would be fascinating. However I can't think of an economic incentive to do it. No one makes money off NA except the practitioner and such a study would be the *last* thing the owners of Collegenase would want to see happen.

In the end it will be the NA experts like Denkler who will use both and then be able to tell us of the comparative strengths and weaknesses through their experiences.