Replies to post #169610 on Biotech Values

[bladerunner1717]

But we shall see what we shall see when they release the fuller dataset. For instance I'll bet that the number of patients meeting "Clinical Criteria" for CI is the same as the number of CIs (3 in the abstract). Not 8 (all true CRs and all true PRs must meet something better than CI "Clinical Criteria" - so if you were right there would be 4 "Clinical criteria" patients from the CRs, 1 from the PR and 3 CIs).

Agreed.


If my interpretation is correct, then Tefferi should have used the " The four CR patients..." verbiage BEFORE he stated "meeting BM and peripheral blood morpholgic criteria." By reversing the phrasing he made it sound like the CR's met only those two criteria for a CR. That's where Feuerstein and jq1234 got confused. Well, jq1234 doesn't think he's confused.

I bet at the ASH presentation there will a data set that shows all the CR's met BOTH morphologic blood criteria AND clinical response criteria. We'll see.

Bladerunner

[iwfal]

GERN and yet another way to differentiate your interpretation from mine, JQ's, pgs etc..

I predict that there will be many fewer patients with Non-palpable spleen and liver than there are "CRs and PRs". But if you were correct there would have to be AT LEAST AS MANY patients with non palpable liver and spleen as there are CRs and PRs.

The point here is that in a full data release it will be easy to tell. If you were correct the clinical response would be very high.