(Total Views: 586)
Posted On: 07/15/2020 1:15:36 AM
Post# of 153986
Re: ClosetInvestor #43015
Thanks closetinvestor. I was definitely foggy on what the monotherapy next step would be.
I did not expect phase 3 mono would be needed because the monotherapy data presented in the July 9 Wall Street Reporter interview was so persuasive.
There was like 30 or 40 patients on that slide, all of whom controlled to less than 50 copies per milliliter for 48 weeks.
And there is that other blurb that 80% of the monotherapy patients achieved this result.
The p-value from the monotherapy trial must be something like .0000000000001 or who knows how many zeroes in there.
The probabbility of viral rebound after HAART interruption must be at least .999.
I confess I cannot understand how the July 9 monotherapy data are anything other than incontrovertible proof of efficacy.
What possible reason could there be to delay this treatment by two years for a phase 3 trial?
Does anyone have a clue?
I did not expect phase 3 mono would be needed because the monotherapy data presented in the July 9 Wall Street Reporter interview was so persuasive.
There was like 30 or 40 patients on that slide, all of whom controlled to less than 50 copies per milliliter for 48 weeks.
And there is that other blurb that 80% of the monotherapy patients achieved this result.
The p-value from the monotherapy trial must be something like .0000000000001 or who knows how many zeroes in there.
The probabbility of viral rebound after HAART interruption must be at least .999.
I confess I cannot understand how the July 9 monotherapy data are anything other than incontrovertible proof of efficacy.
What possible reason could there be to delay this treatment by two years for a phase 3 trial?
Does anyone have a clue?
(0)
(0)
