(Total Views: 483)
Posted On: 03/08/2021 11:09:10 PM
Post# of 153886
3) Amongst all patients in mITT, the primary endpoint (all-cause mortality at Day 28) was not statistically significant. When age adjustment was conducted, the primary endpoint was much closer to statistically significant value.
I was referring to this stat in the PR. Seems like with a few more death counts added to placebo it could have swung from "closer to stat significant" to "stat significant." This is for the the entire mITT which is 384, not just 62. Could have made a much stronger case.
Why do you have to be so combative? I'm just engaging in open discourse.
I was referring to this stat in the PR. Seems like with a few more death counts added to placebo it could have swung from "closer to stat significant" to "stat significant." This is for the the entire mITT which is 384, not just 62. Could have made a much stronger case.
Why do you have to be so combative? I'm just engaging in open discourse.
(1)
(1)
