This is what I ask you to come out, show your face, and challenge the educated JAMA world and see how an idiot you are. Let me explain it even in a simpler form to you. Let us look at the blended mOS results published in 2018 Vs mOS results published in JAMA. You are claiming how comes JAMA mOS results are lower than the 2018 blended mOS results. The answer is in the rGBM efficacy which Dr. Bala says that you are an idiot that you wouldn't understand or you pretend you don't understand but you are good at spinning, here playing with the numbers. You should know the mOS for the rGBM standard therapy is 7 months whereas the JAMA shows you 14 months, a whopping double, for the 64 rGBM patients out of the placebos. The doubling magnitude of the rGBM effect is causing the 2018 blended mOS numbers slightly higher; still the root cause is DcVaxL and is the indispensable drug showing benefit to the patients overall; DcVaxL is the reason that these 64 rGBM patients with no more chemos got their mOS doubled. This is what now UCLA is perfecting in a combo trial with Keytruda plus 2 adjuvants exclusively for rGBM patients where DcVaxL is the indispensable component in the combo. In nGBM patients, mOS reaches pretty fast but the tail takes longer - you know that. The mix of nGBM and rGBM numbers thus threw the blended 2018 mOS numbers slightly higher. The complexity of this mathematics cannot be easily explained with the mOS theory - you know that. It can only be explained by the k-m curve tail theory - you know this as well. But you don't want to be honest. Because you are a fudster. You want to scare away the newbies coming into ihub looking for knowledge. You need to show your face and debate point by point with right people like Liau and Bosch if you continue to confuse this math. Or listen to the JAMA Q&As.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
