This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
My take on this is that since they filled the trial, they were thinking they would achieve statistical significance at 28 days and it would be irrelevant. This would have let them unblind earlier as well.
Correct. That was NP's rationale to skip the interim analysis at 75%.
Best case is 42 day was added and it’s statistically significant. This would explain the timing and the thinking that he didn’t take that recommendation was really just assumptions by everyone here-deserved by the way.
???
That's right. He also inferred that this would enable them to get the data out faster, which we are finding has not happened
As was mentioned earlier, its an adaptive trial, so its possible that the 42 day endpoint may be added. The mortality rate from 28 to 42 days skyrockets and it is possible that this is where LL reaches statistical significance.
We'll see. I just find it hard to believe that NP wouldn't dangle this carrot if that were the case.
Why would this be bad. I don’t think anybody thought LL would be the only treatment on the market.
It’s a direct competitor the way vaccines are a competitor. I hate to turn it into a pure investment discussion but you can think of it as this, like vaccines, should decrease the total addressable market of CYDY. That’s the easiest way to think about the stock impact. It’s still needed but it cuts down the potential.
CYDY's biggest hurdle right now is just being legitimized. If they are slotted as a later stage Covid drug, that's more than good enough at this stage.
I agree. Everything comes down to this. If they cannot get some sort of EUA, then all is lost. We have already seen the incompetence in getting anything else moved forward. LL may be a great HIV, NASH, Cancer drug, but this company is not capable of bringing anything to market. That's why they need Covid to legitimize themselves. If approved, the rest will come a lot easier.
They also will certainly be a good candidate for a buyout if any kind of approval comes from Covid.
I think only if you are buying for long. I'm certainly not adding any more to my position for long at this point though.
That is where I am right now. Sold a bit yesterday, but ####, this is nervewracking.
Not really. IMO the two most likely (and third isn't close) CD12 outcomes are statistical sig and a narrow miss. I just don't see something like RLTLF'S outcome where the drug arm had a higher mortality rate than placebo. The question is what happens if there's a narrow miss--think p-value 0.06 or 0.07. I know the shorts will pound the table that it failed etc but if that happens, it's because of bad trial design IMO. End point should be 42 days and they should only treat patients with elevated rantes. Sure, that's most severe/critical patients but not all.
Problem is if they miss and have to start again, that means no compassionate use and probably will take 2 years to fill a new trial with all the other treatment options available and the vaccine starting to make an impact. Given the committed purchase orders, I suspect they will go under.
Sure but a bad trial design means another trial? With the vaccines pouring out now (and thank god for that) a miss with cd12, even a close one, would seem to shut the door on any positive covid outcome for Cydy.
ride or die 
