I think there is something not many factored in. The trial started enrolling sicker patients halfway through enrollment.
1/2 of 116 is 58. 58 -17 = 41. For simplicity sake let’s say
58% of control were healthier when randomized on average.
41% of control were sicker when randomized on average.
That means there was a difference of 17% more healthy.
In the treatment group
50% healthier on average
50% sicker on average
Maybe we need to wait and see what the data really shows us. If, we assume that 34 sicker patients on average entered the treatment group after the control decided not to enroll its final 17, then you might see more clearly what the parties were dealing with.
Anyway, I’m not certain, you, Ex, myself or anyone else understands what the researchers and regulators were trying to tease out. We just have to wait.
Perhaps the treatment group did better then many think when one takes into consideration they faced more adversity.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
