InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 56
Posts 2752
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/01/2017

Re: None

Friday, 02/08/2019 8:18:10 PM

Friday, February 08, 2019 8:18:10 PM

Post# of 709742
At 3/17 there were 108 alive. Had they reached the 30% alive, 70% dead timeline at 6/17 they would have had 99 alive and 232 events. Dr. Bosch said instead that they had approx 100 alive and they needed about 1 month to reach 232 events. With 2 events per months I take the approx 100 alive to mean that about 101 were alive at 6/17 who will become 99 within about a month (7/17).

So at 3/17 there were 108 alive and approx 101 at 6/17). At 3/17 they may have had a number of LTFU (11 or 12 or whatever) and let's say 218+ or 219(+) dead. Between 3/17 and 6/17 they may have made a special effort to locate the LTFU. They may or may not have found a number of them dead or alive and may have adjusted the math accordingly.

It is my guess that by 6/17 any LTFU not located were assigned to the dead category because it was more important not to exaggerate the number of survivors than to exaggerate the number of dead patients. This is my intuition since this type of solution will prevent anyone claiming that NWBO exaggerated the proportion of survivors so as to make the outcome look better than it really was.

Can anyone tell me how other trials handle this type of LTFU problem?

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NWBO News