ITT is basically best practice to eliminate bias in the analysis, but that per protocol result is more encouraging to me for possible non-inferiority. There must have been a group of patients randomised to SIRT with very bad outcomes who couldn't receive the standard SIRT protocol. Perhaps not suitable candidates for SIRT?
Given the lower toxicity profile for SIRT shown in the trial non inferiority would be enough to boost dose sales (that's before any consideration of downstaging).
Intention to treat analysis and per protocol analysis: complementary information.
...Per protocol analysis excludes patients who deviated from the protocol. It can introduce a form of bias called attrition bias, in which the groups of patients being compared no longer have similar characteristics. The results of per protocol analysis usually provide a lower level of evidence but better reflect the effects of treatment when taken in an optimal manner. Per protocol analysis is particularly useful for interpreting non-inferiority trials and, under given conditions, for analysing the adverse effects of treatments....
