Ann: Proposed issue of securities - CYP, page-12

Where did you see/read that the first 6 patients received daily dressing changes?

I can't remember exactly - I don't have much time right now - I only read the trial protocol change though when background researching - I figured then, as I would now, Jolanta or Kilian wouldn't change it for no reason.

The reason I'm replying to you at the moment though rather than later is - I want to acknowledge a point you made and I didn't really give enough recognition to.

In the original 16 - 8 and 8 - 8 probably got treatment and half got standard of care. So even if there was a breakdown in standard of care up to the protocol change such that it wasn't standard only about 4 - could be out of standard - the next 14 (30 - 16) or so to make up the total of 30 (its 30 in total not 16 in total) could still have enough so that even in a worse case the excessively often bandaged and attended cases in the control group probably weren't fatal - to the trial design so long as only they and not others afterwards in the control arm weren't confounding. My argument is about the control to test arm having to have enough numerical power. I can believe 16 in test arm against 12 in control arm with say 4 in the control arm having to be thrown away for not being as per final protocol could still have the numerical power. 30 patients not 16 is where I think I was being possibly a bit too critical.