Last ditch write up to scare investors. This type of stuff precedes discovery for securities fraud. The trial endpoints both were quite statistically significant for OS, which is the gold standard for cancer therapies. FDA mandated the crossover design that depleted the placebo arm. None of that stuff is mentioned here.
Experts in the field pointed out that the control arm was garbage so none of the “statistical significance” is valid. If they ever file their adcomm will be worse than Brainstorm’s and that was a disaster
The experts in the field were the 65 authors that wrote the paper in JAMA Oncology. Other experts like Al Musella of the Musella Foundation for Brain Tumors have praised this work. The anonymous “experts” that the author quotes may be figments of his/her imagination.
The JAMA publication was also peer reviewed by other real experts in the field. Specificity analysis of the data included in the publication indicated the external controls were easily representative of placebo groups. All other GBM trials cited were compared to this control group and the endpoints of other contemporary trials remained the same using their external control method. This validates the methodology used for the trial.
Jacob Plieth isn’t an oncology doctor or an expert. He has ties to the financial industry being sued by Northwest Bio with evidence presented in the lawsuit of illegal spoofing.
How much did Ken Griffin or little dougie pay you to write this hit piece? You are not a legitimate journalist as you write under a pseudonym yet you are no different than mwh and af that the hedge funds use to distort and lie for them.
Amazing - this is worth a show. Had a good giggle thanks for that.
Nice hit piece Adam. Does a Wells Notice prevent you from writing using your own name or on StatNews?
How could anything keep a reporter from writing a news story? Their 1st amendment rights are ironclad
Discovery will be a bitch for you. Why don't you allow me to follow you on X?
Last ditch write up to scare investors. This type of stuff precedes discovery for securities fraud. The trial endpoints both were quite statistically significant for OS, which is the gold standard for cancer therapies. FDA mandated the crossover design that depleted the placebo arm. None of that stuff is mentioned here.
Experts in the field pointed out that the control arm was garbage so none of the “statistical significance” is valid. If they ever file their adcomm will be worse than Brainstorm’s and that was a disaster
The experts in the field were the 65 authors that wrote the paper in JAMA Oncology. Other experts like Al Musella of the Musella Foundation for Brain Tumors have praised this work. The anonymous “experts” that the author quotes may be figments of his/her imagination.
What anonymous experts? I link to their article in the post. They are named.
The JAMA publication was also peer reviewed by other real experts in the field. Specificity analysis of the data included in the publication indicated the external controls were easily representative of placebo groups. All other GBM trials cited were compared to this control group and the endpoints of other contemporary trials remained the same using their external control method. This validates the methodology used for the trial.
Jacob Plieth isn’t an oncology doctor or an expert. He has ties to the financial industry being sued by Northwest Bio with evidence presented in the lawsuit of illegal spoofing.
I feel bad for the author of this hit piece. It is not well researched.
How much did Ken Griffin or little dougie pay you to write this hit piece? You are not a legitimate journalist as you write under a pseudonym yet you are no different than mwh and af that the hedge funds use to distort and lie for them.
1. I never claimed to be a journalist.
2. I wish someone paid me for this!