InvestorsHub Logo

ElSid18

09/25/16 12:34 PM

#273312 RE: Protector #273311

Cloaked, Biopharm,
give me your best-case scenario fro ESMO..will it move the needle? can we break out of the .40's with ESMO?? thanks for your diligence. and wook, U are always da man...

exwannabe

09/25/16 1:07 PM

#273313 RE: Protector #273311

Cloacked, either parsing is valid Enlgish, but your version fails reality on three grounds.

First, if you believe that stat sig refers to the entire trial primary OS endpoint, then NOTHING can corrolate with it. One can not corrolate to a single value.

Second, the idea that they stopped the trial for futility and it was stat sig in the primamry is more than strange. Even if they included an extra few months, that would not matter nearly enough.

Third, they would have said this clearly instead of leaving obvious interpretations open that are far less positive.


onco

09/25/16 3:29 PM

#273326 RE: Protector #273311

Since it appears that I am the start of the sub set issue,let me try to clarify. ALL parties tested SOME found to have the marker, these become a SUBSET of the WHOLE group what is more important in my opinion is that the trial was called on an abnormal long tax arm this SUBSET had stat sig over this group I suspect comparison to tax historical controls the results will be amazing

IMHO