Campath Phase II results

A board to discuss future MS therapies in early stage (Phase I or II) trials.

Postby gkalman » Mon May 07, 2007 3:26 am

Finn and CureOrBust,

It seems to me that we are solving for very different numbers. One is the cumulative effect of the compounds, the second is the relative effect of Campath alone.

I agree that one cannot come up with a number of Campath acting alone. I.e., it was not tested this way.

The only way to support finn’s calculation, would be to assume independence of effects of the two targets. However, there, one would need to start with a cumulative effectiveness for both, not the relative effectiveness of both vs’ Rebif alone. I.e., if we know that the first target is 30% effective and the second is 80% or 88% effective with respect to the first alone. (See CureOrBusts calc, as I see it as more explanatory than mine.) Then, we can come up with the cumulative number.

Finally, assuming independence and now using the cumulative effectiveness, one can use finn’s calculation to attempt to estimate effectiveness of Campath alone.
User avatar
gkalman
Family Member
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 2:00 pm

Advertisement

Postby finn » Mon May 07, 2007 8:48 am

gkalman wrote:Finally, assuming independence and now using the cumulative effectiveness, one can use finn’s calculation to attempt to estimate effectiveness of Campath alone.
Well, like you wrote, we just can't calculate the absolute effectiveness of Campath with the limited amount of information given in the article. All we can do is assume, really.

-finn
"The great tragedy of science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.” -Thomas Henry Huxley
User avatar
finn
Contributing Author
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Finland

Postby gkalman » Mon May 07, 2007 2:15 pm

Agreed, just wanted to point out for the less statistically minded, the concept of looking for effectiveness of Campath alone cannot be solved for without extra assumptions.

On Bob's original question about effectiveness of the combination, I don't believe there is any disagreement. It does look to be quite high.
User avatar
gkalman
Family Member
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 2:00 pm

Previous

Return to Drug Pipeline

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service