That looks relatively easy to discuss but I do not have the full article. The Yahoo contributor is mistaking a methylated subgroup with the entire cross section of methylated patients.
100 patients enrolled between 2004 and 2007.
By approximately early 2015 (I assume)
97 dead. Sadly.
3 alive at 7.4 years. 8.3 years and 8.5 years. (That is 3%)
Apparently a small subgroup of patients, Methylated Proneural lived a median of 66 months (half lived more, and half lived less). Again, not having the entire article, In a normal distribution proneural methylated would make up about 13% of a GBM cross section. It is not unreasonable to think that a few young people (who are normally proneural methylated) exceeded five years. Unfortunately only six people out of the original 100 lived five years. Only nine lived four years. This is approximately what one would expect in a GBM population.
The Yahoo contributor is confusing all methylated with proneural methylated (The latter is a much smaller subgroup). Again, not having the full article, the likelihood is that these were also g-cimp.
In other words, proneural methylated ( a small subgroup of methylated) lived a median of 5.5 years. Half more and half less. This is not completely unexpected in a small sampling of proneural methylated. In a larger sampling one might expect more toward 36 months.
Again the Yahoo contributor did not consider that the other methylated had median OS of 15.1 months. At most 12 proneural methylated could have been in the trial with six living five years or more, but only three surviving beyond seven years. It might be the proneural methylated subgroup was even smaller, but regardless it is a small sampling either way.
Respect Risk. Conduct Your Own Due Diligence. Manage your assets wisely. Diversify.
