Really?? Many trials are published, looking positive, but are rejected by regulators. Peer-reviewers are at the mercy of those providing the manuscript, protocol/SAP -- omissions, etc.
Already there are three JAMA Oncology article Comments and a Journal of Neurol-Oncology Editorial written by well-qualified neuro-oncology clinicians detailing deficiencies in the trial design/execution that invalidate any trial conclusions.
I'll take the word of highly regarded neuro-oncologists who have specifically identified trial deficiencies. Things that will be clear to regulators who have more more time and manpower to review the trial.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
