Doing a little traveling I noticed INSM was dropping but guessed it was only pulling back after the recent run. Now I see that Fuerstein has apparently been courted by a group of Insmed shorts to do his best to raise concerns about the eventual success of arikace, and he does it so well!! I didn't see a single lie in his story,, ,, it's just that he doesn't tell the whole story.
In particular this statement: "Generally speaking efficacy analyses conducted on ITT or mITT populations are more conservative." That is true because The vast majority of efficacy analyses are looking for superiority, or at least equivalency!! When it comes to non inferiority studies, ITT and mITT are actually anti conservative, especially when dealing with antibiotics, and even more especially when dealing with antibiotics within a small patient population. In non inferiority studies involving antibiotics per protocol is the most conservative method. Certainly don't trust me - simply google some of the key terms.
i.e. from PubMed: Abstract
While the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis is widely accepted for superiority trials, there remains debate about its role in non-inferiority trials. It is often said that the ITT tends to be anti-conservative in the demonstration of non-inferiority.