(Total Views: 882)
Posted On: 11/16/2020 4:32:55 PM
Post# of 155715
Re: craigakess #65603
“What's nicer, I think, is that they are thinking of talking to DSMC about reviewing the data earlier than 293 or not waiting the 42 days.”
Like CDiddy and others have said, I don’t know if CYDY can simply request or even recommend the DSMC look sooner than 75%. If the DSMC recommended a 75% analysis of 28 and 42 day mortality based on their understanding of the data at 50%, I don’t know why they look sooner. This statement by NP may be similar to the one he made about an analysis at 50 patients which didn’t align with the regulations regarding the DSMC.
Like CDiddy and others have said, I don’t know if CYDY can simply request or even recommend the DSMC look sooner than 75%. If the DSMC recommended a 75% analysis of 28 and 42 day mortality based on their understanding of the data at 50%, I don’t know why they look sooner. This statement by NP may be similar to the one he made about an analysis at 50 patients which didn’t align with the regulations regarding the DSMC.
(1)
(0)
