News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Dr Bala

07/05/23 8:02 PM

#606977 RE: exwannabe #606974

This nonsensical post lacks understanding of the benefit that the crossover had. Total nonsense and confusion.
icon url

georgebailey

07/05/23 8:27 PM

#606981 RE: exwannabe #606974

Ex Your saying the majority of the 99 left SOC for the treatment arm because why? Cherry picking from a false set of data points is now a thing…….
icon url

Doc logic

07/06/23 11:19 AM

#607120 RE: exwannabe #606974

exwannabe,

At crossover (after progression) about 85% of tumors became mesenchymal signature based on historical numbers attributed to transition into more aggressive mesenchymal phenotype. By the time original treatment patients progressed, most or all of their vaccines were likely used up leaving very little to no additional benefit from crossover. This means original treatment patients had about 50% mesenchyma,l more of which would have been unmethylated status, and crossovers had about 85% mesenchymal with likely more methylated status percentage wise vs original treatment arm carried through from original association to tumor genotype. However, moving past the medians we see that original treatment had a higher percentage of long livers which is the ultimate advantage being strived for. So the discrepancy you point out does not take into account the advantage of a higher long liver status being imparted by early treatment vs late, the higher rate of mesenchymal at transition able to benefit from active vaccines or the higher % rate of methylation in the crossover population. JAMA Oncology editors and reviewers would have been very aware. Go fish!; ). Best wishes.