Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tuck who wrote (23531)	4/24/2007 10:47:28 AM
From: NeuroInvestment	Respond to of 52153

Tuck: At least at first glance, I don't see anything new here--perhaps they have mined the data for more results than are in the abstract, and will discuss them at AAN. It raises the question: How much can one milk a 183pt study? Intent-to-treat analysis is the more conservative option, in that you avoid introducing bias by excluding dropouts, which in theory could be confounded with non-response to treatment, side effects, etc. There are situations where ITT can actually improve likelihood of finding positive outcome compared to excluding dropouts--if one assumes the treatment might have provided lasting--in this case, neuroprotective--effects that could persist after a patient drops out--one benefits from keeping them in the dataset. I'm sure there are others reading this who can speak to the pros-and-cons more knowledgably. Harry NeuroInvestment