InvestorsHub Logo

rogers5729

11/19/18 10:40 AM

#198811 RE: GoodGuyBill #198759

I find it interesting that the PR shows survival percentages of 2017/2018 side by side. This would seem to be something not worthy of comparison. For any treatment, we should expect all those percentages to be the *same* at pretty much any mature stage of the trial. For instance, the same percentage of patients should be making it to 3 years regardless of whether they were the first or last patient enrolled in the trial.

This increase in the 3+ year survival for the whole trial could be attributable to two things: 1) a proportionally larger treated population [i.e., the ratio of treated/placebo changes and more treated patients are three years out]; 2) the process improvements that have been discussed on this forum are indeed showing measurable gains in the long tail

Both of these situations are bullish for the treatment's effectiveness. What I find peculiar, however, is how very little changed in the 2 year survival, while the 3 year survival went up significantly (and regardless of MGMT status). This fact seems to bolster the importance of the fat tail. Still have to mull on this awhile...