Lack of relevance per safety issues - some people have been on 2-73 for close to two years now.
You make a good point. I see now that the high dose of the other drug was only tested for 10 weeks in the first trial and didn’t develop safety issues until 6 months in the second trial. I don’t believe we know what dose the dropouts were on with Anavex (do we?) so perhaps it is indeed a nonissue since ~9 people have apparently been able to tolerate 50mg of A2-73 for over a year.
Probably wouldn’t have been a deal breaker anyway imho, because they have 20mg to play with between the 30mg and 50mg dose. (Could just try 40 mg if necessary for example)
That post was 100% obfuscation.
Complete lack of correlation and misrepresentation of data...
Different MOA
Really because I said this:
2. Who would have guessed the FDA would grant “fast track” as results didn’t seem particularly impressive. Perhaps a good sign for A2-73’s chances.
3. Notice how long the trial is taking even with Fast Track? Three years! And that’s for strictly a Phase 3 not a combined 2/3. They actually received fast track in 2013 so it’s been closer to 5 years to design and complete the Phase 3.
4. Perhaps “rates of hippocampal shrinking or CSF biomarker measures. “ are indicators that Anavex should be measuring?
5. Looks like this soon to be completed trial is not targeting A-beta either, maybe it can help lower that 99.6 rate?
Which one of those didn’t you like. (I was shocked at how long it still took with Fast-track status myself but please don’t shoot the messenger. Hippocampal shrinkage is an interesting metric what would be wrong with Anavex utilizing that measure?
Now I have an important question for you!
Do you believe the 99.6% failure rate for Alzheimer’s trials doesn’t apply to Anavex because A2-73 is targeting Sigma 1 and not A-beta and Plaques?