Vintage, yes you are insinuating "manipulative innuendo"!for...

Vintage, yes you are insinuating "manipulative innuendo"!
for starters:
1. Same endpoints (proteinuria and e GFR)
2. Same length- 2 years
3. Very similar inclusion and exclusion criteria which you can easily check for yourself.
4. Similar choice of comparator - angiotensin blocker. In travere study it is specific, irbesartan. In dmerix trial it is any angiotensin blocker. with placebo

/yes I know there are also differences between the 2 trials. I know the drugs work differently. I never said the trials are identical, but you can't deny there are similarities.
/just because a company puts out a slide in an investor deck with lots of bold statements like the one you show, doesn't mean the claims can't be questioned.
/I don't think the travere people would be impressed seeing statements like "failed phase 3 endpoint" pushed out in another company's public material, looks like gloating. It's also not accurate. their phase 3 study had 2 endpoints, one on proteinuria and the other on GFR. The proteinuria endpoint was successful. The GFR endpoint wasn't. everybody assumes it's a fail and won't be approved by FDA but do you know that for certain. what if FDA turns around and approves sparsentan for FSGS? then the content of that slide will look silly. according to the paper published last week the sparsentan study is now in longer term follow up, so called open label extension...so it's not closed, so you could say it's still under investigation....which means the title of the slide ""only one therapy in phase 3 development"" also looks on shaky ground- agree?

enough science and logic for you???