Replying to you because your post is recent with a trial link. I...

Replying to you because your post is recent with a trial link.

I still think it matters what the breakdown of treatment to control arm is - is it 30 and 30 or 40 and 20? Are they trying to keep that split as something they can change because they haven't specified it explicitly - say its harder to recruit - I hope not.

With 30 centres aimed at (I think I read that is a link to commentary by KK you found pledge) thats only 2 per centre on average for the 60 (though they don't even have a hard commitment on 60 (I get it (truss20 most likely to observe that) statisticians (DSMB etc) are supposed to be reviewing as things go along -- - but is a lot of potentially different locations - which can sometimes introduce other variables.

Pledge - no one, that I can see is essentially disagreeing with you that it is not guraranteed that CYP has enough cash to complete the trial as planned.

I will be very pleasantly surprised (because its against the clear long pattern of performance and because management haven't released anything like sufficient detail to give confidence that this time is different) if they actually complete recruitment by the end of the year.

Europe is important to have approval for - but Europe and GvHD has been notoriously difficult a collection of places to recruit in - for example the RETHRIM trials got mentioned at MSB's ODAC by one of the visiting experts showing how hard it was to recruit - for kids - in europe - with the different country by country requirements). This is not kids. That may help. But Europe had some really whacky laws - Italians - Catholics - strange country by country cultural attributes to when life begins and contraception etc effecting the laws from memory.