Do not believe shoter!
Again, the placebo is just sugarpill, not an effective drug on the market. If neratinib improved 2% over some comparable drug, that will be more interesting as it is better than an effective solution. If it only has 93% vis 91% better rate over a sugarpill....
Well, thank for info. It seems that similar result were reported this time with last year's. Do not know why share price reacted so differently. Still I think 2% difference cannot adjusts doctor or patient to use the drug and diarrhea prevention drug ( 2 added treatments) for long time (2 year or even longer) for such tiny difference. If the absolute difference is greater 10%, it can make a difference. This is just my common sense. Regardless how the company or biostatistican manipulate the number.
Just want to understand a few issue:
1, 2014/7 ExteNET Phase 3 trial announcement: "... The results of the trial demonstrated that treatment with neratinib resulted in a 37% improvement in disease free survival including ductal carcinoma in situ versus placebo". Did that trial shown result of 1-year followup?
2, The lately 2015 ExteNET phase 3 trial is 2 years? Why last year shows the drug has 37% benefit over paclebo, whereas this year 2-years followup only showed 2.3% improvement (93% over 91%)? How the company calculated last year's 37% improvement?