Replies to post #78862 on Biotech Values

[poorgradstudent]

GNVC / General comment:

From a purely statistical standpoint, a 1:1 randomization is optimal; however, this must be balanced against the faster patient enrollment that is enabled by having a 2:1 (or even more unbalanced) randomization.

Has any company really done well with this type of time / cost-cutting?

Smaller companies do it all the time, but I'm at a loss to point out a sufficient number of examples to justify this type of approach. Are the managements that stupid, in general, to keep going down this path that rarely pays dividends?