Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[keep_trying]

Thurly, in a double blind placebo study, it doesn't make sense for anyone (including an ex Genentech employee) to claim that PPHM was remiss by not having someone on staff or contracted to review statistical integrity by auditing the blinding third parties while in the blinded period. Why? That "check" mechanism could be opportunitized to give PPHM trial result progress specific to patient dosing statistical information that could be communicated in a manner compromising the blinding. If your contact is saying other "smart" Pharma are doing such contracting to hedge their blinded trial risk, it begs the question as to what information they are receiving that hedges the downside risk of following study protocol per the FDA "Gold Standard" criteria. Even having another third party situated to review real time details of what the CRO third party contractor did or didnt do compromises the blinding if there is any actionable feedback to any party involved with the trial.

Perhaps, I am missing something here?

Best wishes and IMO.

KT