Just curious - I looked at your posting history... You seem very passionate about your subjects and I was wondering how you all of the sudden tripped and fell into this board.
Tradergirl - I'm not in NWBO (I am in IMUC so I peek over here every once in a while just to see what is going on...) but found your post interesting. One question for you - why are you here?
You missed something... go back and listen to the last CC - I believe they even said it a few times (and repeated by the analysists on the call)
Against my "better" judgement I added more (3X as much as I had originally) at around 1:50 a little bit later... glad I did since it took some of the AEZS sting out of me.....
I agree Disco - but I believe his question was regarding the comments from management about the trial ending in Q3 or Q4 of this year...
Nick - I will entertain your questions, but only for the benefit of the others that read these messages (I believe you know my opinion of you...)
1. As far as I recall, the have always said Q3-Q4. My ONLY point of confusion is with their statement that they did another "high level analysis" (or something like that kind of wording) taking into account the timing of the 32nd event and said that it would be Q3-Q4.
2. I just ran 500 runs on my model using the STUPP 18.8 and a 24.5 month curve (so around a 6 month survival advantage) and I get the 64th event can happen anywhere from mid Oct through late Mar of next year - so yes it is possible, just not probable.
Well May was my "green zone" for the 32nd event so I've been committed ever since then (bought my shares well before that) I would say a date for the 64th but that whole 3-4 months of analysis bull is throwing me off (3-4 for TOPLINE.... really???) Based on my model, the timing of the 64th in Feb / Mar would be good then whatever time is needed for analysis.
The CC's reference the Stupp 18.8 curve as the comparable to this study - the 14.. OS is an all-around historical median that includes the non resected also. I used the UCLA curves because these are the longest OS's that I have seen with a large number included in the data - I have seen WAY too many trials fail due to the control arm outlasting historical norms so when I invest, I try to cover my behind! No harm in being too conservative... We will all know the truth hopefully mid next year!
I "validated" my investment based on the timing of the 32nd event - if I was not concerned that the PPS would go up before Jan/Feb of next year, then I would have waited to invest more at that point in time (if announced before that time frame then there is a chance that things are not going as well as I would hope.
The CC comment that they "did a general reassessment based on the timing of the 32nd event" (something to that effect - can't remember the exact words) and found that the trial should end sometime in Q3 or Q4 confuses me greatly - cause I just don't see it... if the Stupp 18.8 curve with no benefit put the 64th event in Sept then what are we missing?
...That was with no benefit... and I get the highest probability of the 32nd event (no benefit and 20.5 months) happening between 24th of Feb 24th and Mar 23rd. If I use the Stupp 18.8 curve, I essentially get 32nd in Feb and 64th in Sept (obviously, the shape of the curves also affect the outcome as does the median OS value...)
I used the UCLA curves (around 20.5 OS at the time - just checked again and the median of all patients is currently sitting at 20.13 months) and I get the highest probability of the 64th event happening between Nov 17th and Dec 14th (80% chance of it happening between these dates.)
So, I pulled back out my model results and also dug-up the CC notes... 32nd event was announced in June and based on what we deduce from the CC, it is assumed the actual timing of the 32nd event was about a month earlier (beginning of May or so...) With this timing - I still get a low probability of the 64th event happening in 2013? Are the other board modelers still agreeing with me on this? (I think the only major difference is that I used a higher median OS than most of the other modelers so that I was on the conservative side for my decision to invest.)