InvestorsHub Logo

AVII77

02/24/17 7:55 AM

#104205 RE: BWIS #104202

Were these 51 considered the worst of the worst? Was 14 months a great number for that group?



That's what Linda Powers said about them.

I noted the Info Arm was likely "chock full" of psPD patients.

I was soundly rebutted by many here.

Then, Dr. Liau recently said the "apparent rapid progressor" cohort were very likely psPD.

Vindicating my earlier assertion.

So, to answer your question, the 51 included BOTH the worst of the worst (ePD) and the Best of the BEST (psPD).

Was 14 months a great number for that group?


It is impossible to say because of the combination of both ePD and psPD.

However, this is a reasonable cohort to use when considering the types of patients (and their survival) that the ICT-107 Ph2 trial included (because they didn't use MRI assessments at baseline, 4 months after diagnosis, to remove these patients from randomization.)