"The most egregious sin imho is the fact that they are presenting charts labeled "all patients" for a time period that covers a trial that started with 32 patient's and ended with 25.
I'm not sure what I corrected. It's exactly what I said to begin with isn't it?
Heck I can't even tell you what the difference is between " all evaluable patients" and "all patients". Problem is no one else knows either. Did you notice "all" in "all evaluable patients" was in italics? Why? If they stated what would be represented in all the following data on page 21, why did they bother to label the graphs on page 29 "all patients"? Shouldn't both those charts on page 29 have been labeled "all evaluable patients"?
Could it all be an innocent misunderstanding? Sure it could. Maybe you should consider asking IR for clarity. Wouldn't it be fantastic to show me it was ridiculous to be concerned when IR replies to your request for the definition of "all evaluable patients"?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
