Great and logical question Nidan.
And regarding today’s p/r and article, apparently scientific writers and CEO’s such as Dr M are warned/advised/threatened to temper any and all enthusiasm regarding efficacy.
Yes I’m finally internalizing this.
Instead they’re encouraged to just plainly and cautiously display results for others to interpret for themselves.
Dr M and other independent 3rd party researchers’ confirmatory abstracts/findings can lead us to the water, but they’ll never make us drink.
Whereas for a lay person such as myself, it’s really not that complicated. It takes a certain dosage (blood concentration level) to have the best chance of improvement/stabilization? Wow, novel concept.
Who would’ve ever thought that you may need to reach a certain tolerable dose/blood level of the a2-73 compound to achieve the desired result?
And that if you took a low to moderate dosage then perhaps you’d not reach an efficacious result?
Please someone assure me that the scientific community was/is smart enough to have expected such an outcome.
It was likely in 7th grade that I learned to consider taking two Tylenols (instead of one) if I’d prefer my headache symptoms to subside faster. Not a hard concept.
Reach max tolerated dosage for optimized results.
Ariana made it explicitly CLEAR that our (never before seen improvement/stabilization in AD patients over a year) efficacy is tied to dose / blood concentration levels of our compound.
They referenced the dose/blood concentration correlation approximately 20 times in their independent pk/pd presentation.
What else is not complicated? That Alzheimer’s Disease patients do not magically stabilize or improve over a year or two.
That placebo effect doesn’t cause stabilization/improvement in AD patients. Multitudes of prior peer-reviewed studies have confirmed this.
Was that point emphasized by Michele Sullivan today? By Dr Missling? No, not at all. Why? Attorneys probably.
Attorneys’ advice is likely also the reason that optimism and emphasis has not been placed on the fact that no prior AD trial (that I’ve been made aware of) has ever shown:
(a) over 50% of its highest tolerated dose (blood concentration) patients IMPROVED/STABILIZED over a two year period
NOR,
(b) simply showed “improvement” over baseline for any material number of Alzheimer’s trial participants over 1 or 2 years
Many here have done our own DD and have come to some COMMON SENSE conclusions (at this stage) based on publicly available information. How long it takes for other market participants or
writers or the Alzheimer’s Association or scientists tied to big pharma to express optimism or excitement (gasp) remains to be seen I suppose.
GLTAL and above is merely my non-scientific set of opinions and observations. Not intended as advice in any sense of the word.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
