(Total Views: 649)
Posted On: 01/11/2021 6:56:34 PM
Post# of 154977
51% Decrease In Mortality Rate With Leronlimab/....
Why do you say MAV MD is assuming all patients are critical?
Because of his numbers?
Leronlimab death rate in our eIND earlier this year was 14.5%
MAV MD used 17%
MAV MD use a placebo death rate of 34.7%, reports vary presently from 30% to 52% for s/c deaths with SOC.
Regardless, Nader said 87 deaths total, s/c, and thinking is there more critical patients vs severe, but of course not all critical.
We can start with placebo deaths, anywhere from 30% to 50%, then by subtraction get the number of leronlimab deaths. I prefer to start with Leronlimab deaths, and 17% seems like a reasonable number (14.5% old eIND data).
No matter how you do the math, if you start with 87 deaths, even with modest estimates, you end up with a very acceptable % reduction in deaths with leronlimab. Leronlimab in Phase III s/c trials would need to be a different molecule (vs old eIND data) to not to achieve Statistical Significance.
Why do you say MAV MD is assuming all patients are critical?
Because of his numbers?
Leronlimab death rate in our eIND earlier this year was 14.5%
MAV MD used 17%
MAV MD use a placebo death rate of 34.7%, reports vary presently from 30% to 52% for s/c deaths with SOC.
Regardless, Nader said 87 deaths total, s/c, and thinking is there more critical patients vs severe, but of course not all critical.
We can start with placebo deaths, anywhere from 30% to 50%, then by subtraction get the number of leronlimab deaths. I prefer to start with Leronlimab deaths, and 17% seems like a reasonable number (14.5% old eIND data).
No matter how you do the math, if you start with 87 deaths, even with modest estimates, you end up with a very acceptable % reduction in deaths with leronlimab. Leronlimab in Phase III s/c trials would need to be a different molecule (vs old eIND data) to not to achieve Statistical Significance.
(0)
(0)
