(Total Views: 391)
Posted On: 10/02/2025 9:41:37 AM
Post# of 157673
.jpg)
Jake
why must half the 60 enrollees have only a 25% chance, instead of an 88% chance, to be saved?
This seems like common sense to me and I agree with you, it will make the enrollment harder than it should be and they may find another trial with a better opportunity.
It's like saying, come take a chance but we won't give you the best % chance...maybe only 25% even though we know that 88% is possible and almost totally safe with no side effects.
That is backward thinking coming from the FDA that I just don't understand.
NJ
why must half the 60 enrollees have only a 25% chance, instead of an 88% chance, to be saved?
This seems like common sense to me and I agree with you, it will make the enrollment harder than it should be and they may find another trial with a better opportunity.
It's like saying, come take a chance but we won't give you the best % chance...maybe only 25% even though we know that 88% is possible and almost totally safe with no side effects.
That is backward thinking coming from the FDA that I just don't understand.
NJ
(12)
(1)
