(Total Views: 476)
Posted On: 09/05/2021 3:54:58 PM
Post# of 155211
Re: Borel Fields #102559
The Nature Bio comment about CD-12 had me thinking about about my favorite (admittedly data-mining) result from that trial.
Nature's phrasing is "... in patients critically ill with COVID-19 ... [r]esults showed a survival benefit compared with commonly used treatments..."
I remember a CD-12 patient subset excluding maybe 100 patients who hadn't received any other common drugs (junk patients?). If I recall, this set was analyzed including a proxy variable for being over 65, and was stat sig regarding death. Here, Nature adds critical patients only as a limiter. That said, they didn't use the word significant.
It would be really nice to know what particular result(s) Nature views as sufficiently meaningful to support that statement. Hopefully, one with more than 19 patients in the control group.
Can someone less lazy than I dig out a link or two? Thanks.
Nature's phrasing is "... in patients critically ill with COVID-19 ... [r]esults showed a survival benefit compared with commonly used treatments..."
I remember a CD-12 patient subset excluding maybe 100 patients who hadn't received any other common drugs (junk patients?). If I recall, this set was analyzed including a proxy variable for being over 65, and was stat sig regarding death. Here, Nature adds critical patients only as a limiter. That said, they didn't use the word significant.
It would be really nice to know what particular result(s) Nature views as sufficiently meaningful to support that statement. Hopefully, one with more than 19 patients in the control group.
Can someone less lazy than I dig out a link or two? Thanks.
(0)
(0)
