(Total Views: 99)
Posted On: 01/27/2017 9:28:52 AM
Post# of 72443
Gents, I was just re-reading the last PR, and have a question/thought regarding "Preliminary review of endoscopic images and video from Screening and Day 42 in patients in the first cohort showed meaningful improvements for 5 of the 6 patients, including noticeable reductions in ulceration and bleeding. "
Wasn't it the case the 1 of the first 4 patients failed to have the 42 day endoscopy? I recall a previous PR which said something to the effect that the one patient who did not follow up, still registered improvements according to patient and staff evaluations. Does it follow that the last 2 patients both had "meaningful improvements"? So the reason 1 out 6 that didn't have "meaningful improvements" was just because he/she never followed up for 42 day endoscopy, so in fact they did get 6 out of 6 "meaningful improvements"?
Wasn't it the case the 1 of the first 4 patients failed to have the 42 day endoscopy? I recall a previous PR which said something to the effect that the one patient who did not follow up, still registered improvements according to patient and staff evaluations. Does it follow that the last 2 patients both had "meaningful improvements"? So the reason 1 out 6 that didn't have "meaningful improvements" was just because he/she never followed up for 42 day endoscopy, so in fact they did get 6 out of 6 "meaningful improvements"?
(0)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
