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 : Biotime-Nasdaq's best kept secret? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Roof who wrote (942)	5/15/1998 11:05:00 AM
From: Stephen How	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1432

The only way you can say that Hextend cannot be shown as superior is to say that the data is incomplete and not broad enough. Ie., if the sampling were among 10,000 patients and the data said the EXACT same thing that it did with the small phase III trials then Hextend would be a rousing success. ... I am not saying that the data says anything statistically other than Hextend works and is safe BUT from what I see every skew of the data favors Hextend. What are the chances of that if we are simply talking sampling error? I think that the SD are high because of an uneven distribution of blood volume replacement (e.g., a few high volume replacement patients in each group affect the means significantly). It seems funny that .12 L +/- .47 L (hetastarch) and .04 L +/- .25 L (Hextend&reg) FFP were administered when a unit of FFP is .5 L. The administered platelet volumes are even lower. I think the poor distribution of data is causing a high SD which is masking the means and differences in means. If much larger studies are run, I expect the distribution of volume replacement to be much better, and for the numbers between the two groups to become much closer, and show no ss differences in the means. As you know, the SD of the mean of a sampled white gaussian RV (random variable) decreases as the square root of the number of samples. Off topic: are you a creationist? Steve