Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***OFFICIAL CYDY/Leronlimab Thread***


Recommended Posts

Ugly chart, only positive is that it has a meaningful support level at 2.75 but if it looses it then maybe I'll buy some back at $2.00.

Listened to the CC replay.  LOL, its like he's raging against the world, sounds unhinged.

Edited by djmich
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 8.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes, go ahead FC42

I closed.  Cydy operation mountain house completed.

Fear is a disease.  Get rid of it or you're doomed for failure.  Though I did hear Leronlimab cures it. This is NOT an investment.  It is a Grand Slam Home Run or a Strike Out gamble in the stock

I read somewhere that Nadar said he expects CytoDyn to be 10x's bigger than Gilead.  The guy is absolutely delusional.  10x's Gilead would be almost 800 billion market cap (2x's bigger than the current #1 biotech/pharma Johnson and Johnson)

He's a legit moron.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chet’s silence in here is far more scary then the bad news that’s rolled out over the last few weeks imo.  The only worse news those of us still holding stock could get is that @Otis is buying big blocks of it.
 

 

 

*Otis I kid I kid.  Just bustin your chops.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Chet’s silence in here is far more scary then the bad news that’s rolled out over the last few weeks imo.  The only worse news those of us still holding stock could get is that @Otis is buying big blocks of it.
 

 

 

*Otis I kid I kid.  Just bustin your chops.  

He's cashed out for sure. I would be. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dkp993 said:

Chet’s silence in here is far more scary then the bad news that’s rolled out over the last few weeks imo.  The only worse news those of us still holding stock could get is that @Otis is buying big blocks of it.
 

 

 

*Otis I kid I kid.  Just bustin your chops.  

Dude is on vacation, let him enjoy being out of the US

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CGRdrJoe said:

Dude is on vacation, let him enjoy being out of the US

Ummm. OK.  Am I supposed to know I’m his schedule? Didn’t realize mentioning him on a FF forum was such a hassle....

Edited by dkp993
  • Laughing 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If CytoDyn is planning on paying the .005 penalty to get the data, they aren't going to tell anyone beforehand.  They are going to say that they aren't going to do it.  They want the DMSB to think that they need to stop the trial for people to receive the drug.  It puts the onus on the DMSB.  But I hope that they do decide to pay the penalty.  When looking at the p value charts, a change of .005 isn't a big deal.  It is far less than 1 death even with 390 patients.  Landing between .045 and .05 isn't likely.  But maybe CytoDyn doesn't want the data.  No data keeps the charade going for another 3-6 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A p-value at or below 1% (0.01) will definitely be seen as significant. The question may come if it falls between 1% and 5%. Non-life-threatening treatments can get away with the 5% threshold and their drug has a track record of safety so 0.05 or less should be sufficient. It wouldn’t shock me, though, if the FDA or other powers are more conservative and want to see the 1% threshold.

Look at me, I teach Statistics and I also own CYDY!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Don Hutson said:

Do the charts in the this link look accurate to you for a 2-tail p value?

https://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=5914267

I don’t know why he’s using a t-test, which is intended to compare the mean difference between 2 groups.  The chart is not looking at means but rather a difference in proportion of deaths between the 2 groups.  Chi-squared or Fishers exact would be more appropriate.  And :lol:   at using Excel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don Hutson said:

  No data keeps the charade going for another 3-6 months.

Yep.

This is their dilemma with unblinding it.  On top of having a penalty applied, they have no idea what they are going to find.  Of course, they are hoping the data is good enough that it at least silences the critics and at best puts a lot of pressure on the FDA to do something if its out in the public.

However, there is a chance that the data is not going to be favorable.  Are they going to release that to the public?  Your scenario of no data is better than bad data and they would certainly prefer to keep the charade going I believe.

What a strange company to be invested in.  I think the drug works though.

Edited by Dwayne Hoover
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

@adamfeuerstein

https://twitter.com/adamfeuerstein/status/1311742657308381184

$CYDY CEO Nader Pourhassan, speaking during shareholder meeting yday, blamed his CFO for screwing up Nasdaq uplist. He also blamed (now former) consultant Bruce Patterson for FDA's rejection of leronlimab HIV application. Surreal infighting now public.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 2:19 PM, Chaz McNulty said:

This came from the Yahoo board.

If death is 20 in placebo, L is 25, p=0.03, placebo death rate is 30.77%, L is 19.23%
If death is 19 in placebo, L is 26, p=0.08, placebo death rate is 29.23%, L is 20.00%
If death is 18 in placebo, L is 27, p=0.19, placebo death rate is 27.69%, L is 20.77%
If death is 17 in placebo, L is 28, p=0.38, placebo death rate is 26.15%, L is 21.54%

@fred_1_15301 @pecorino Does this chart look accurate?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

Yep.

This is their dilemma with unblinding it.  On top of having a penalty applied, they have no idea what they are going to find.  Of course, they are hoping the data is good enough that it at least silences the critics and at best puts a lot of pressure on the FDA to do something if its out in the public.

However, there is a chance that the data is not going to be favorable.  Are they going to release that to the public?  Your scenario of no data is better than bad data and they would certainly prefer to keep the charade going I believe.

What a strange company to be invested in.  I think the drug works though.

With no data, this drops below $2 for sure.  With bad data it goes to $1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Trump has the rona someone get him some LL stat!

Thoughts and prayers are the preferred solution. Sending what I can afford.

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, fred_1_15301 said:

I don’t know why he’s using a t-test, which is intended to compare the mean difference between 2 groups.  The chart is not looking at means but rather a difference in proportion of deaths between the 2 groups.  Chi-squared or Fishers exact would be more appropriate.  And :lol:   at using Excel.

@fred_1_15301 @Don Hutson

I just used the tried and true method of the internet... post something quickly and you will get all the right answers handed to you. Seriously, I would have used R or SAS if I had more time but I was just trying get close to the right answer.  DM me if you have any suggestions to get a better answer. I'd like to get what I have corrected if it's off.

What also I get from the numbers I put together is the small number it will take to move from significant to not ( 3 - 4 negative outcomes) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dave RL said:

@fred_1_15301 @Don Hutson

I just used the tried and true method of the internet... post something quickly and you will get all the right answers handed to you. Seriously, I would have used R or SAS if I had more time but I was just trying get close to the right answer.  DM me if you have any suggestions to get a better answer. I'd like to get what I have corrected if it's off.

What also I get from the numbers I put together is the small number it will take to move from significant to not ( 3 - 4 negative outcomes) 

Sorry thought you were some random dude from the internet (not a footballguy).  Didn’t mean to offend you but Excel is so ancient these days when it comes to stats.

I’ll look more closely later but a T test is not used to compare proportions (I.e categorical variable ).  A T test is used to compare the mean difference (I.e. continuous variable) between 2 groups.  I would need to look more closely at the data and unfortunately in my current role I no longer have access to SAS.  @pecorino any thoughts?

 

Note - I completed my masters in biostats 18 years ago but haven’t really had to practice it much since.  So I could be off here.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, fred_1_15301 said:

Did they mention the statistical test that they used?

Because of the variation of tests, and because we don’t know if they have existing information on things like standard deviations of populations etc., I wouldn’t say one way or another whether those tables are correct. However it has been noted that, with such a small sample size, even a change of one or two deaths can have a big affect on the P value. That’s why these researchers would like to have larger samples.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fred_1_15301 said:

Did they mention the statistical test that they used?

This is all Greek to me.  It's 195 patients with 45 deaths.  Some have said it is supposed to be 2-tailed.  Trying to figure out how many deaths in each arm would encompass the p values from .005 to .05.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 3:19 PM, Chaz McNulty said:

If death is 20 in placebo, L is 25, p=0.03, placebo death rate is 30.77%, L is 19.23%

This would work out to:

Treatment arm

105 alive     25 deaths

Placebo arm

45 alive       20 deaths

If the placebo arm has more deaths:

Treatment arm

108 alive     22 deaths

Placebo arm

42 alive        23 deaths

Does the first scenario actually have a p value of .03?  What is the p value of the second scenario?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Don Hutson said:

This would work out to:

Treatment arm

105 alive     25 deaths

Placebo arm

45 alive       20 deaths

If the placebo arm has more deaths:

Treatment arm

108 alive     22 deaths

Placebo arm

42 alive        23 deaths

Does the first scenario actually have a p value of .03?  What is the p value of the second scenario?

I was just quoting from Yahoo board.  I don't know the formula for figuring this out.  From what else I have read, I think the p-value would be higher and not SS in the first scenario.  But it would be SS in the 2nd scenario.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@fred_1_15301

I'm used to healthy skepticism so no problem, I've worked with many stats guys in my career but not in the medical field so I was not sure what was the most appropriate method. I looked at several examples using the Excel TTest but I'd rather find the official method for drug trials. I think I'll also move to R as that is a more robust stats package ( and I don't have access to SAS anymore ). I'd like to know how they are currently calculating the p value as it seems there are a lot of differing opinions at current and I could not find a specific example or guidance from either FDA or NIH docs. If anyone else has any info, let me know as well. Thanks!

Edited by Dave RL
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chaz McNulty said:

I was just quoting from Yahoo board.  I don't know the formula for figuring this out.  From what else I have read, I think the p-value would be higher and not SS in the first scenario.  But it would be SS in the 2nd scenario.

My calculated p-value was a little higher but I don't know what test they used and what alpha level they set.  I also don't have access to SAS at the moment so I was just relying on an online calculator.  However, I was in the ballpark of the result that they found (just a little higher).

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Dave RL said:

@fred_1_15301

I'm used to healthy skepticism so no problem, I've worked with many stats guys in my career but not in the medical field so I was not sure what was the most appropriate method. I looked at several examples using the Excel TTest but I'd rather find the official method for drug trials. I think I'll also move to R as that is a more robust stats package ( and I don't have access to SAS anymore ). I'd like to know how they are currently calculating the p value as it seems there are a lot of differing opinions at current and I could not find a specific example or guidance from either FDA or NIH docs. If anyone else has any info, let me know as well. Thanks!

There are a lot of considerations that would determine the appropriate statistical test (which in turn is used to calculate the p-value).  It depends on what the outcome variable is (e.g. continuous vs categorical) - in this case it's proportion who died in placebo vs LL.  It depends on what type 1 error (i.e. alpha or false positive rate) the investigator wants to set a priori.  It depends on whether or not they're adjusting for multiple comparisons.  It depends on one-sided vs two-sided.  It depends on the distribution of the outcome variable and the standard errors (which may dictate the need to transform the data or run a parametric vs non-parametric test).  It depends on sample size. 

It's really hard to replicate what a random guy on yahoo did without having more information but the fact that I got somewhat close is a good sign.   

BTW - I know I'm nerding up this thread right now so I'll stop.  Show me the money!

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This from a poster on Yahoo.

Fox News On Harris’s show speaking with Dr Sapphire - Fox News Medical Advisor and Dr Markary of Johns Hopkins University Hospital.
While discussing the greatly reduced mortality rate in the treatment of CV19, Harris asks “does everybody have access to the better (read efficacious) drugs? Dr Markary replies “well monoclonal antibodies are ironically going to probably to get approval, this week, next week or the following week, and its really a coincidence that that’s the week where the president may need a candidate for something like that ..

Could also be referring to regeneron, lilil, and hgend?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave RL said:

I'm reading through this now to see if it has some specifics, but, I have my real work to do first: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6169785/

I guess the question I have is “Should the P-value hold so much weight in regulatory decision making?”

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, fred_1_15301 said:

I guess the question I have is “Should the P-value hold so much weight in regulatory decision making?”

Yes, I have the same thought. It's a good indication that you are seeing something different but to only depend on that as a single gatekeeper is a bit facile. I think I did see other articles like this: [https://bitesizebio.com/26743/3-common-myths-about-p-value-alternatively-never-ever-rely-on-it-for-data-interpretation/]

Another one: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6169785/] When the Alpha is the Omega: P-Values, “Substantial Evidence,” and the 0.05 Standard at FDA

that illustrate that point.

Edited by Dave RL
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SFBayDuck said:

Gotta love that the first thing he uses is something like LL. Why isn’t he taking Hydrochoronique or Remdesivir?

Not to get political but it’s ####### ridiculous that so many people have died on his watch and he doesn’t take the stuff that his admin has been pumping for months. Despicable and the folks at FDA should be ashamed as well. Downplaying the pandemic instead of pushing forward trials of all these antibodies is legitimately criminal. So many people died who could have been part of all of these trials months ago.

I’m sure his cronies were part of the last 10 minutes of trading and before. 110k of the 900k shares traded were in the last 5 minutes of trading. Looks like the first article was posted at closer to 4:30 after the market closed. So predictable. 

Edited by stbugs
  • Like 4
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, stbugs said:

Gotta love that the first thing he uses is something like LL.

Regeneron is not "something" like leronlimab aside from being a mab.  There are hundreds of mabs and they are not all similar.  Regeneron's cocktail and the Lilly's mab are anti-virals.  They are good to use at the beginning of a Covid infection when you want to combat the virus.  Leronlimab is an immunomodulator that is good to use when things have progressed to the point where it is no longer a viral issue but is an immunological issue.  Covid is far more an immunological issue than a viral issue. 

Leronlimab is not in competition with either Regeneron or Eli Lilly's mab.  They can work in concert.  One first and then the other.  So use Regeneron or Lilly's mab early and use leron when things get bad. 

Edited by Don Hutson
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...