News Focus
News Focus
icon url

markjohn62

12/01/22 8:55 PM

#387273 RE: roberti #387255

A pic from CTAD.


icon url

frrol

12/01/22 9:28 PM

#387311 RE: roberti #387255

McFarlane confirms what Missling was saying in the CC: the company didn't have the data yet. They just got it yesterday. The "they definitely have all the data" stuff was nonsense. And McFarlane just got it today.

As for the missing or incomplete ADCS-ADL disclosure: given the above, there were clearly time constraints in preparing this deck. We'll get more tables, and some charts, soon. So when comparing what was given for ADCS-ADL vs ADAS-Cog, I don't suspect any major concerns or crafty omissions. It looks like we got very strong signal. And the sub-group breakouts may bring more.

Final note: a lot of the results are Bayesian ("of those who did improve..."). We do need to see non-Bayesian. Or sub-grouping that shows we can predict who will improve more. We'll be getting all of this soon. Again, this can come down to dosing and S1 status. The company very likely just hasn't had time to do this analysis. The timeline on this CTAD presentation was tight, to say the least. Amazingly tight, frankly.
icon url

rx7171

12/01/22 11:51 PM

#387408 RE: roberti #387255

I find it highly significant that the data was a combination of the 30 and 50 mg treatment groups.
We know from the Phase 2 trial the 50 mg group did significantly better than the 30 mg group.

If the segregated data in this trial follows that of the Phase 2 the 50 mg treatment arm data will be very very strong and convincing and will become the intended standard of care.
Bullish
Bullish