The other thing that cadno isn't assessing is the makeup of those enrolled in the trials. Were they mild or mild-mod alzheimers patients? What was the age range of those in the trial? I think the 273 trial enrolled older (or was it younger?) subjects and more further advanced with disease. Both factors make it harder to get improvement
I agree with all of that. "Work" is relative, but sure, it begins to decline after one month to a few months. However, the data we have for 2-73 shows similarly, apart from that uptick at 52 weeks which I don't put too much emphasis on statistically.
I agree on side effects, as I stated below, but the difference between a drug with equal efficacy with few side effects and a drug with a stable MMSE over two years with few side effects is night and day. It's the difference between a drug with real potential and a drug with paradigm shifting blockbuster potential.
I am aware the 2-73 dose is not optimized. I'm working with what is at hand, for the time being. What else is there? I certainly don't see this data as anything other than preliminary and is certainly not "as good as it gets," if that's what you're suggesting.
Re the optimized dosage, what dosage did they put them on for the extension after the 57 weeks? I've seen someone write that they put them all on optimized dosage, but I haven't seen that on the website.