That's interesting that you say the company makes a price sensitive announcement on 30.04.20 that they had "begun" enrollment when they had in fact begun enrollment a month earlier, and at a time before even the initial FDA IND announcement 06.04.20 and the initial NIH Trial announcement 09.04.20. Just don't see it. I prefer to think that USC did the prelims and recruited in 4 weeks, not 8.
Either way we do agree and @lindym that for USC the more likely interpretation of the unclear language in the article is that they dosed the 20 or 30 during May. So their 30 day results are "ready" to be analyzed by the DMC. And 30 at USC alone is a fair wack of the 90 we need for interim analysis. That's exciting. This is the first clue in all this time as to where we might be at.
As for the 6 May "first dosing", I had always assumed that to be Mount Sinai, who had the EAP protocols and experience, and at that time heaps of candidates. Cheers.
(20min delay)