@yiwang, are you a scientist of some sort? Thanks for summing this up so concisely.
If you are a biologist, can you educate us a little more about the efficacy of the new drug?
I have heard a lot of the critics downplaying the power of this new drug. They probably have no understanding of the cognitive impairment measures being used in these studies.
The 2.5 and 1.5 points of higher scores in the two cognitive measures are incredible. The measures have at a total of 30 and 18 points, and a difference of five or seven points in the score can make the difference between serious cognitive impairment and minor impairment.
The 2.5 points in higher score was after 1 year. After three years, could it be 7 points difference? Seven points is a world of difference. I would certainly stay on this drug despite the side effects that some have experienced. I do not have the disease but I have people close to me that suffer from AD.
Here is the summing up from the WSJ on the incredible power of this drug to prevent cognitive deterioration:
Using the Mini Mental State Examination, or MMSE, patients receiving the largest dose of aducanumab worsened on average by 0.58 points, or 2.56 points fewer than the 3.14-point decline among placebo patients, a statistically significant advantage, the company said. Baird’s Mr. Raymond had said that a difference greater than one to two points between aducanumab and the placebo would be “meaningful.”
In a separate measure, called the Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes, or CDR-SB, patients on the highest dose of Biogen’s drug declined by 0.59 points, or 1.45 points fewer than patients on placebo, who declined by 2.04 points.
“The reduction in the level of cognitive decline was higher than we had expected,” Bernstein analyst Geoffrey Porges said. “In short, the more drug [that] patients took, the less their cognition declined, and the longer they took it, the bigger the difference between treated and control patients,”
no comment on this important measure of mental acuity and the drugs effect on the test resulst?? no scientists here?
at .05 and .01 levels on various measures; now if you look at all the measures and ask what is the probability that it is statistically significant at all the measures they have announced, you get a very very high probability. Pretty much a p of .001, is my guess. from my study of statistics in grad school, most of which I have forgotten.
At least 40 billion a year, I deduct from this study, and that's only the USA market:
Changing the Trajectory of Alzheimer's Disease: How a Treatment by 2025 Saves Lives and Dollars calculates that a treatment introduced in 2025 that delays the onset of Alzheimer's by five years would reduce the number of individuals affected by the disease by 5.7 million by mid-century and save all payers, including Medicare, Medicaid and families, more than $220 billion within the first five years.
Look, if you deteriorate by 5 points over the course of 3.5 years that could mean the difference of being institutionalized or not. It might take ten years to deteriorate that amount on the 10 mg dose. Who knows, maybe its effect is even stronger, or weaker. But those seven years are golden. Really valuable. Mild impairment is one thing. Severe is something different.
I should say avoiding a 1.5 increase in the CRB sum of boxes, as the measure is reversed, as the higher the score, the worse the cognitive impairment.
This exam is only 18 points total, and the 10 mg dose allowed patients to avoid a 1.5 drop in this test score of cognitive ability in one year!!! comparing about 2 to about .5 difference in drop from placebo to 10 mg dose. That's one year. Three years, what might it be? I mean if I can get a five extra years without more-than-mild impairment, I will be overjoyed!!!
Unbelievable. Do you know that the MMS scale is only 30? And that there is a six point difference between mild and moderate cognitive impairment? Avoiding a 2.5 point drop in the course of one year? Through a medication? I mean that could be avoiding a five point drop in two years or a 7.5 point drop in three years. The 10 mg dose saw only a .5 drop in MMS over 54 weeks. I compare that to placebo of about 3 point drop.
I mean the drop likely slows over time, for placebo, but that 3 point drop is pretty big and to avoid 80% of that, that's worth how much? That is worth a lot!
IMW will be a big source of income this year. China is quickly expanding nat gas and alt fuel vehicles to combat the source of greatest political unrest: pollution and pollution caused cancer, lung disease. people are apoplectic about this in China. IMW will reap their 160 plus million contract this year.
This is the truck that the Americans use. The Chinese use the Weichai truck.
3400 trucks added to the roads in Q4 is great for CLNE. Maybe not spectacular for WPRT, though it was quite a relief considering the slamming down of oil prices.
WPRT also stated that the price difference in ng and diesel still makes ng trucks compelling.
3400 trucks in one quarter added, means how many more millions of gallon-equivalents of nat gas fuel? If each truck uses 10,000 gallons each year you are looking at 34 million more gallon-equivalents added in one quarter.
If there are 15,000 trucks added in 2015, and each uses 10k gallons, that is 150 million more gallon-equivalents. That's just CWI trucks. Not counting other brands/sizes of ng vehicles.
California Outlines Stepped-Up Alternative Transportation Fuels Push
Natural Gas Intelligence (subscription)-Mar 2, 2015
Under the CEC's Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (ARFVTP), 60 natural gas vehicle (NGV) fueling stations .
scralex, people forget that CLNE has a 160 million dollar contract with China Gas for nat gas compressors. When the new pollution policy comes out for the CCP, that contract work may kick into high gear. Policy comes out soon, environmental minister just praised an anti-pollution documentary that as caused a small uprising in China.