ANDS is evidently playing games by reporting non-ITT data in the calculation of EVR in the phase-2a ANA598 trial (#msg-50475044).
I follow you. Great catch Dew. This is further evidence that, contrary to management's assertion otherwise, ANA598 may not in fact be "one of the most attractive agents in Phase 2 HCV development today [LOL]."
Even if this was ITT data, I would question how great an improvement going from 63% in the SoC control arm to 73% in the ANA598 200mg BID + SoC arm really represents (not including the 400mg BID arm because that dose won't be carried forward due to the rash issues). I am also curious about the one patient in the 400mg BID arm that experienced viral breakthrough. As this higher dose won't be carried forward, isn't it safe to assume that, in future trials with more patients and of longer duration, the lower dose 200mg BID arm will be susceptible to showing more patients experiencing viral breakthrough with ANA598?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
