Re STRENGTH, there can be a big difference between extending by a year the end of the trial and extending by a year the median or mean duration a subject spends in the trial. I didn't look at it in great depth, would be interested to read and adjust if someone looks it up. Don't know if they had a very long recruitment period like RI, or if they increased their target number of events. If they did (and it would help them), they should have to pay a price like Amarin did for their interim looks. The far bigger factor in my analysis was the reduced EPA level, more than duration. Also, it might help them if STRENGTH avoided Ukraine (only half joking, I don't trust their compliance, worse health and inexplicably less RRR).
Wouldn't expect the bottom line to change a whole lot from duration, which is why I didn't spend more time chasing the details. There are other factors too (different subject profiles etc).
My original post we refer to, estimating STRENGTH performance, is # 210571.
Market Data 
Markets 
