<So if the follow up to DN-101 eventually brings the log rank p value under 0.05, would you support approval?>
When the time comes, I will look at the entirety of the data first before making a decision if I am still interested. My post pointed out an inconsistency in Dr. Scher's reasoning, ie, a counter-argument. It does not imply anything further. You can read more into it but that is your prerogative.
<How do the FDA's alternate cox models (#2, 3, and 4) that gave p values above 0.05 support the survival benefit finding?
As usual, it is easy to spin things one way or the other.>
To your second question, the statement about the sensitivity analysis was made by the FDA stat reviewer, not me. Again, if you need to spin that as a spinning argument to make a point, it is your prerogative. And my prerogative is not to reply further to that sort of base insinuation. Bye.
