>> in your first message [#4615] you said .0125 for each OR .05 for all. which is really meant or both? <<
I just reread #4615 and my language was indeed ambiguous. Mea culpa.
What QLTI needs to show for a successful VIO trial is p<0.0125 in any of the four endpoints. However, they have already missed the 3-line and 6-line endpoints at one year, leaving only two remaining shots on goal: the 3-line and 6-line endpoints at two years.
The chance of QLTI’s hitting either of the two-year endpoints with p<0.0125 is not good, in my opinion.
Thank you for bringing the ambiguity in #4615 to my attention. Regards, Dew
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”