#. "You keep insisting on comparing apples and oranges. You are...

#. "You keep insisting on comparing apples and oranges. You are wallowing in the wrong paradigm." WRONG. Comparing a trial in fsg with a trial in a different kidney disease type would be apples and oranges. Comparing a fsg trial with another fsg trial which both use the same endpoints and recruit from same patient group is apples and apples. Pretending the sparsantan phase 3 fgs trial and their discussion with fda don't exist and have no relevance to dimx is unbelievably naive and just dumb.

#. "What is different about your position is the hubris in believing that the trial will be a failure before the event". WRONG AGAIN. Never have I said dimx trial will fail. what I have said is that I think "accelated approval" based on your 144/35wk urine protein results is unlikely and like fda told trevere, dimx will have to do same and complete the full study and come back with 2 year GFR results before approval. that looks to be possibly 4-5 years away. and that scenario looks more likely I'd say now - trevere showed great urine protein urine interim results at week 35 yet flunked their final GFR endpoint result.

and @ owl v fox- throw all the insults you want, usually a sign that they have nothing useful to say and knows that the person they insult is probably on to something..