This is my last message on the topic of Vertex before moving on.
Many insisted the final result was good, but it's much worse because management refuse to provide comparable data.
Let's do apple to apple comparison: From the interim result, combined result of 200, 400, and 600 mg Vx809, absolute improvement in lung functions by day 56 was 4.0% with p=0.002; The final result of 600 mg alone was only 3.4% with p=0.03. It can't be more clear that comparable results are much worse than reported.
Worse yet, the data report can be fraudulent unless management can come out clean with two important issues:
1. 600 mg Vx809 decreased lung function by 2.9% by day 28. what happened at dosages of 200 mg and 400 mg? if no such big drop was observed at lower doses, 600 mg dose is toxic, isn't it?
2. among the 11 of those over 5% and the 5 of those over 10% res-ponders, what was the average decrease in lung function on day 28 due to toxicity compared with the others? If they had worse condition on day 28 than the rest of the group, the reported final results are artificially inflated. Should management have indicated that in the news release?
And there are too many other questions, such as why results became so much worse when patient numbers only doubled? Because they are done at different sites or different ethnic background?
Most small investors have no other means but dependent on management's release of results. The selective nature of Vertex's data handling is a great cause of concern.