InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 252386
Next 10
Followers 73
Posts 3426
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 04/28/2004

Re: mcbio post# 153866

Monday, 12/10/2012 10:35:26 PM

Monday, December 10, 2012 10:35:26 PM

Post# of 252386

I.e., the smaller number of patients in the trial should make it much more difficult to attain stat sig results yet the results were robust enough to do just that.



I would disagree with this.

I would think that such small numbers increase your chance of seeing a result that is not representative of the "true" outcome as would be revealed by a large trial. In a sense, the result here is driven by the 4 control patients... if by chance they're a tightly knit group of 4 with very similar (but somewhat atypical) outcomes (ie. low st. dev.), then they could be the driving reason for the statistical significance.

Put it this way: if these results were stat sig from 4 patients on drug and 12 on the control, there would be significant skepticism (rightly in my mind) about a company touting a stat sig result. I don't see why having 12 patients on drug and 4 on control makes it any more comforting.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.