InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

io_io

10/11/07 9:51 AM

#865 RE: jshaffer85 #864

<"Why is the time to treatment failure a better measure of efficacy than total treatment failures over the 50 day period?">


It is like a Survival trial, say the Provenge 36-month analysis.

The total treatment failures measures only how many failed, which is of course the most important thing. Statistically it is a simple analysis (I can give you a link if you want to try).

The time to treatment failure of course also measures how many failed therapy, but spices it up by factoring in a bias for how long exactly each patient lasted on therapy before failing. That is not a simple analysis (usually thing is to do a "Kaplan-Meier" study on the data).

Maybe the most important thing though is that the pre-specified method was the time to treatment failure.

Which is why you and I were able to buy the stock so incredibly cheap.
icon url

drbio45

10/11/07 9:58 AM

#867 RE: jshaffer85 #864

Why is the time to treatment failure a better measure of efficacy than total treatment failures over the 50 day period?


if you are asking why they used the endpoint they used instead of treatment failures at 50 days I have no idea. then again, in the phase 2 orbec didn't have the problems in the first 10 days so it wasn't an issue.