Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[rmitra]

Kura and Mori --

I do think the problem with Du's logic w.r.t Kura is significantly stronger than the problem with Du's logic w.r.t. Mori.

Mori found

1. EPA treatment does not statistically significantly increase LDL (compared to placebo, olive oil). BUT there was an increase observed.
2. DHA does statistically significantly increase LDL compared to placebo.

Now if you want to claim DHA raises LDL more than EPA, you have to do a direct comparison. When this is done, there is no statistically significant increase.

So IMO, Mori ALONE does not teach, in an obvious way that EPA raises LDL levels less than DHA. But why not? Well the direct comparison fails the significance test, so you might assume that perhaps EPA treatment actually does increase LDL levels, but because of the small sample size, it failed to show up as significant. It is also POSSIBLE from Mori that it was the EPA versus DHA comparison that failed due to a lack of power, which would imply the EPA treatment raises LDL levels less than DHA treatment. Either option is possible, neither is "taught".

How could one decide between these options? Well, you could look at other studies, and if you found additional evidence that EPA does not raise LDL levels in a *similar* population, (this is another thorny issue -- good arguments can be made that the Mori population is NOT relevant to the MARINE indication) then you might reasonably conclude that DHA raises LDL while LDL does not. Is that obvious? No, I don't think so, certainly not from Mori alone. However, you can make the case that Mori DOES teach that DHA raises LDL levels relative to placebo, just not relative to EPA. There is some hint of the "right" path, that could then be gleaned by referring to additional literature.

Kura teaches there is no stat. significant difference between EPA and placebo. There is no other way to interpret those particular data that is not erroneous.