Re: Hi Harry...
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:32 pm
Hi Lauren,
The person who I mentioned on Brain Talk was very aware that Tysabri and the CRABs have never been compared head-to-head in any trial.He took the long standing disease progression efficacy of the CRABs from the many trials that have been done with them vs placebo and compared the "risk of progression" efficacy of Tysabri in the same manner vs placebo. That's how he came up with only a 12% improvement which in reality is the only way one can even attempt to compare the two without head-to-head trials. Not NEJM publishable by any means but certainly a perspective of bringing Tysabri down to earth.
I am certainly not trying to curtail any enthusiasm for you or anyone else who wants to use this drug but at the same time, one has to take these numbers and place them in the proper context.
Take care.
Harry
we have been waiting over a decade for an efficious therapy, Ty is 68% efficious or 2/3's superior over the "possible" efficiacy of the ABCR's,
I took the liberty of quoting the part of your message that indicated that Tysabri was possibly 68% more efficious than the CRAB's. The 68% number that was in the NMSS FAQ had nothing to do with the CRAB's but was the relative comparison of relapses to placebo patients during the trials. You simply can't come out and state that Tysabri has this kind of possible efficacy over any other drug for the same reason you quoted above!First, there have been no 'head to head' comparisons of Tysabri vs. the CRABs...and I never indicated that...therefore your friend's "absolute" comparison is meaningless to me (no disrespect Harry, but if it's not published in the opinions of the NEJM, for me personally, the 'comparison' holds no water).
The person who I mentioned on Brain Talk was very aware that Tysabri and the CRABs have never been compared head-to-head in any trial.He took the long standing disease progression efficacy of the CRABs from the many trials that have been done with them vs placebo and compared the "risk of progression" efficacy of Tysabri in the same manner vs placebo. That's how he came up with only a 12% improvement which in reality is the only way one can even attempt to compare the two without head-to-head trials. Not NEJM publishable by any means but certainly a perspective of bringing Tysabri down to earth.
I am certainly not trying to curtail any enthusiasm for you or anyone else who wants to use this drug but at the same time, one has to take these numbers and place them in the proper context.
Take care.
Harry