24 would be reasonable as the only time I could explain 91 alive in November 2017 was when I assumed around 50% survival at 2 years. That could mean 22 or 28 MOS as median is just the middle and not average. I guess if there were extreme non proportional hazards, it could show a median at 20 months with a steep early curve and 60 degree turn on a flattening line as time moves on(Like a plane falling and the pilot finally pulling up and gliding into the landing) If 47% were alive at 24 months it would be the lower end or 53% at 24 would mean the higher end. I am looking mostly at the hazard ratio in time and if you have an improvement in 2, 3, 4, and 5 year survival %'s as I think it is easier to prove with the enrollment curve they gave vs number alive crossed against other survival percentages. Median is an important calculation but if the median advantage was small, would you take a drug that doubled your chance of surviving 3 years if had minimal safety issues and a quality of life miles beyond other treatments?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
