This is one of the msgs I wrote after the CD12 res
Post# of 154867
(Total Views: 497)
Posted On: 11/11/2021 12:57:02 PM
This is one of the msgs I wrote after the CD12 results came out, back on March 9th, 2021 -
I hesitate to bring this up but does anyone else find the trial numbers suspicious?
Looking at them, I come to them with the conviction that I stated in msg 81679 - "Make no mistake - all recipients of Leronlimab benefited to some degree, even the ones too far gone to survive!" Not all of the trial patients were in the ICU because of Cytokine Storm but I know that Leronlimab shut down RANTES in everyone who got it! By some metric, Leronlimab helped everyone!
So why aren't we seeing the results we were expecting to see in these CD12 numbers? I'm not talking about primary and secondary endpoints and p values. I was expecting to see the result we saw from the first uses of Leronlimab with Seethamraju, Lang, Agresti and Reknor. Sure SOC has gotten better but NEWS type scores, Ordinal Scale numbers should have been better, much better in my opinion.
We had some large improvement by some individuals so of course the Ordinal Scale numbers would go up but if the numbers of all patients who got Leronlimab went up, we should see these numbers much higher. What happened to individual patients is lost in the average totals reported in the 8K report.
If something suspicious was going on, it would have shown itself in the individual cases where, after injection with Leronlimab, there was no patient improvement at all. We may not have used the metrics in the trial to show this but that result would have been there. Blood tests would have been nice but just the clinical outcomes should have been obvious.
This issue really worries me because if something funny went on with the CD12 trials, it could go funny with this CD16 trial. What are the checks and balances? Are we totally sure that those who were supposed to get Leronlimab really did get Leronlimab?
Can we compare the Ordinal (NEWS) type scores of those who got Leronlimab thru OLE and eINDs with those in the CD12 trial? Can we insist on blood tests after Leronlimab administration in the CD16 trial? We can't afford any screw-ups!
The truth about that trial still exists in the most granular data of the trial participants. But even that was probably screwed up by Amerex. Did their "understaffing" even mean LL wasn't administered correctly to patients and the data collect there?
We shall see!
I hesitate to bring this up but does anyone else find the trial numbers suspicious?
Looking at them, I come to them with the conviction that I stated in msg 81679 - "Make no mistake - all recipients of Leronlimab benefited to some degree, even the ones too far gone to survive!" Not all of the trial patients were in the ICU because of Cytokine Storm but I know that Leronlimab shut down RANTES in everyone who got it! By some metric, Leronlimab helped everyone!
So why aren't we seeing the results we were expecting to see in these CD12 numbers? I'm not talking about primary and secondary endpoints and p values. I was expecting to see the result we saw from the first uses of Leronlimab with Seethamraju, Lang, Agresti and Reknor. Sure SOC has gotten better but NEWS type scores, Ordinal Scale numbers should have been better, much better in my opinion.
We had some large improvement by some individuals so of course the Ordinal Scale numbers would go up but if the numbers of all patients who got Leronlimab went up, we should see these numbers much higher. What happened to individual patients is lost in the average totals reported in the 8K report.
If something suspicious was going on, it would have shown itself in the individual cases where, after injection with Leronlimab, there was no patient improvement at all. We may not have used the metrics in the trial to show this but that result would have been there. Blood tests would have been nice but just the clinical outcomes should have been obvious.
This issue really worries me because if something funny went on with the CD12 trials, it could go funny with this CD16 trial. What are the checks and balances? Are we totally sure that those who were supposed to get Leronlimab really did get Leronlimab?
Can we compare the Ordinal (NEWS) type scores of those who got Leronlimab thru OLE and eINDs with those in the CD12 trial? Can we insist on blood tests after Leronlimab administration in the CD16 trial? We can't afford any screw-ups!
The truth about that trial still exists in the most granular data of the trial participants. But even that was probably screwed up by Amerex. Did their "understaffing" even mean LL wasn't administered correctly to patients and the data collect there?
We shall see!
(8)
(0)