I agree the data in the pre-print and now published (online) paper are nice. The one criticism which Patterson and others have talked about are that we don't have any s/c Covid controls who didn't receive leronlimab tested with the same tests. So, we don't know if the subjects would have had the cytokine and plasma viral load drop on their own or not without a comparison group. Probably not, but science requires proof. That's why my last post I said I was puzzled. Patterson in a youtube video said he now had the missing "control" data to be added to the paper, and the paper talks about the 5 Covid controls from Wash U / Barnes Jewish in St. Louis, but I didn't see any actual data from them in the paper!

These are the same figures from the pre-print, without Covid controls who didn't receive leronlimab, so why say you added 5 Covid controls but not show any data from them in the new paper?

Need to show that leronlimab caused the pVL and IL-6 to drop in Covid, by comparing to similar subjects not given LL.

Anyways, I don't think these things happened by chance, and they very likely are due to LL, but we really need to see non-LL Covid controls. Maybe I missed it in the paper? We were thinking they have the same information from the CD12 trial (randomized to LL or placebo 2:1), but with the apparent and confusing split from Patterson, maybe he didn't process any of the labwork for CD12, and we don't really have any Covid placebo pVL and IL-6 data at all?

Maybe some day this will all become clear, perhaps as further publications come out.


Great news on the financing today, and nice SP bump to go with it.