Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[Investor2014]

By your assumption of course it would not be 187, its just that your assumption is not sound reasoning.

In a next trial you would want to avoid the same issue happening again. The best way would ensuring a 1:1 drug/placebo design and a trial size that conservatively takes into account the known variability in RSBQ and CGI-I scoring. The last thing you want to do, as WGT folks here were so certain about, is to assume the A2-73 effect size is so amazing that you can easily get away with a small trial.

Probably > 187 would be preferable, but of course not so easy given the patient population and their challenges. It is likely also that Anavex tried to make the trial appealing by increasing the chance to get drug over placebo, but it back fired. Clearly and the current context a larger trial in the first place would have been the better solution too. Do it once and do it right!