Clearly we disagree. You are adding context to her words that is not there. No where did she diminish the results of PFS. Only you did. She didn't even mention PFS. I have pointed out before that when clinical researchers discuss "early verse late" they are discussing the difference seen at initiations point. Here is an example with the Avastin.
"Question: What do you think best explains the fact that overall survival data from the bevacizumab arm of this study were not good, even though progression free survival was improved in this arm?
So the RTOG 0825 clinical trial comparing bevacizumab and placebo in combination with standard of care included a crossover at the time of tumor progression. So at that point the treatment arm was unblinded and the patients had the option if they were on placebo crossing over to bevacizumab. If they were on bevacizumab continuing with a bevacizumab containing regiment. That fact alone could obscure an overall survival benefit if you were asking the question: "bevacizumab, in the treatment of brain tumors, versus no bevacizumab?" So in essence, you would be asking the question "early versus late bevacizumab is there a difference?" Our data suggest there is no difference. "
And by the way, I presented her comment as well. Stating that we disagree on whether you added context to her words and then me pointing out the context that I see isn't a straw man argument. Funny how you go there. It was not necessary.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
