InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 253120
Next 10
Followers 5
Posts 701
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/10/2005

Re: iwfal post# 43776

Wednesday, 03/28/2007 3:40:02 PM

Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:40:02 PM

Post# of 253120
>>> The FDA has a long history of allowing x-over in a trial with a surrogate endpoint after each patient has met the surrogate. This is not much different. So I don't understand your point. <<<


I don't have a problem with crossover designs , per se , just when the crossover experimental drug is not the same as the treatment arm experimental drug.


Imagine a situation where the freezing process generates factors in the crossover Provenge that add to efficacy , or add to toxicity , or both. You would have a hard time sorting it all out in a trial like this. If the crossovers had lived twice as long as those who received fresh Provenge , could you tell whether it was due to the freezing or , instead , to the delayed administration ? You'd have a similar problem if frozen Provenge caused patients to die much quicker than the non-crossovers.

There may be no such confounding in these trials but it's still a bad design for pivotal trials in first-in-class drugs , IMO.



Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.