I'm puzzled by the idea that there is "perfect data" and "failed data."
What about "in between data?"
IMO, this is what we have, and this is why we need 2-3 weeks of discussion with multiple agencies. We have a story to tell about secondary endpoints, or perhaps 42 day mortality, or perhaps a subset of "perfect data" on critical, but not severe, patients. We need time to tell that story. And, multiple audiences wouldn't hurt.
I agree with you: if we had failed data, we wouldn't need 2-3 weeks. But, I think if we had perfect data, we would tell people right away.
Misui -- do you see this as a possibility? How about you, Dieselpro?