This is my last post for the day. Nobody's confused, except you. Higher all-cause mortality is not "better". Get it?
Day 28 Mortality, mITT
53/259 (20.5%) 27/125 (21.6%)
The first group is Leronlimab. Second is placebo. 21.6% is higher than 20.5%.
It's not "better". It's worse.
You seem to be the only one struggling with this concept. Why are YOU confused? It's been explained over and over and over.
BTW, mITT is also laid out:
394 subjects were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to leronlimab or placebo, in combination with SoC therapies. 384 subjects received at least one dose of the study medication (leronlimab 700 mg Or placebo administered subcutaneously on Day 0 and Day 7) and are included in the mITT analyses.
Why would anyone include 10 subjects in a study when they didn't receive either Leronlimab or placebo. That's just bad research. This is like having 25 people in a class, and 10 people are out sick on the day of a test. The total test takers is 15, not 25. There's nothing confusing about it.