Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[Protector]

exwannabe, that is NOT what this PPHM PR extract says:

Anyway. I am leaning back to more my orriginal reading.

Presented data will include a biomarker in the SUNRISE trial that correlated with a statistically significant improvement in overall survival for patients treated with bavituximab in combination with docetaxel compared to patients treated with docetaxel alone.

I.E., what was stat sig is that those with the biomarker live longer. And what does that mean for Bavi? Very little w/o further data.

So WITHOUT EVEN THE BEGINNING OF A DOUBT the word 'correlation' splits the phrase in two parts:

... a biomarker in the SUNRISE trial

that correlated with a

statistically significant improvement in overall survival for patients treated with bavituximab in combination with docetaxel compared to patients treated with docetaxel alone

What is statistical significant is "the IMPROVEMENT IN OVERALL SURVIVAL"!

A) No mentioning of sub-group, that is something that was invented on this board but has NO GROUNDS in PPHM communications.

B) The Bavi+Doce improved overall survival compared to Doce+placebo

C) PPHM has a biomarket that allows to come to the SAME conclusion (and that is the point of the biomarker).

BECAUSE IN ANY OTHER REASONING someone must explain to me what the VALUE is of a biomarker that would tell us that Bavi+Doce has a BETTER overall survival then Doce+Placebo if the UNDERLYING REALITY doesn't reflect EXACTLY the same thing.

In other words, the biomaker would be COMPLETELY WORTHLESS because it predicts us a false reality!



PPHM's PR that says : "...that correlated with a statistically significant ..." would, for your reading to be correct, have to say "...that correlated IN A statistically significant way..."

In that case PPHM would have been talking about the statistical significance of the biomarker. But there was no reason to say that because they say they had one that correlated with a statistical significant situation (related to overall survival). So there would NOT BE ANY CORRELATION worth a PR or even worth mentioning the biomarker if that correlation was not statistical significant ITSELF. Let alone that they would be allowed to give such important presentation on that specific topic in the conference.