Replies to post #164027 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

XOMA—I don't know how the proposed scale would map to the SUN/NEI system.

There are two things going on here: i) the VH scale itself (the matter you addressed above); and ii) what measurements are reported in the two abstracts you posted. The 87.7% number in the first abstract you posted is measuring something quite different from the 0.53 (and 0.75) concordance numbers in the second abstract.

Regarding VH vs. BCVA, I would wager that the 0.53 concordance number for VH in the second abstract is roughly comparable to the concordance number typically seen with BCVA, which is more error-prone than many people realize, partly for the reason mentioned in #msg-89921712.

[VH] concordance within 1 grade improved to .75, but that represents half the scale range.

Agreed—when a 1-point difference is half the difference between a responder and non-responder in the endpoints of the EYEGUARD trials, the 0.75 figure, considered on its own, does not add to one’s confidence in the trial outcomes.