On second thought I change to a as well unless the protocol was re spa d. The conservatism may have. Othing tO do with punishing ad hoc analysis except to appease fda in regards to the dmand for two positive trial approval mandate.
I changed my thinking after listened to past cc The met hi subgroup as defined in the 2010 subgroup analysis included only a small faction of patients Primary endpoint specified itt population nowhwere was met subvroup specified in secondaries even though they went through the effort of doing that for the egfr mutation subgroup.
Nevertheless the adjusted hr of 0.58 in the no squamou subset still makes the final a good long bet
I wouldn't fret about the sq subset as in light of the tailor trial which showed clear inferiority to docetaxel in second line egfr wild type nsclc it would be a wonder that it will ever be use in second line squamous histology especially after egfr mutation test becomes soc. To that end I rally have. O idea what arql's Japanese trial in egfr wild type is trying to accomplish with the egfr wild type study.
I am slightly cooncerned whwether the metmab trial would enrich met hi-negative patients into the Marquee trial
Regardless of nsclc I think the hcc development enhanced arql value
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
