>PRW – They say the drug extended survival by x, but no mention what the comparison was against, or how they came up with it.<
Indeed! PRW’s use of the word extended borders on fraud, IMO.
What PRW is actually saying in the PR is that patients in the Davanat trial had a median survival of 6.7 months from the date of enrollment, which tells us close to nothing.
Patients who have failed all standard therapies in this disease do not automatically drop dead the next day. For all we know, the patients in PRW’s trial would have lived a median of 6.7 months (or longer) on no therapy at all.
In short, PRW’s PR is not merely a case of hyping the results of a trial without a control arm—it is something much more untoward than that.
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”