Ann: NTCELL Parkinsons trial patient data 2 years after implant, page-51

I'm wondering if they didn't do the stats on the information they had, or maybe the controls in the 120mc group contributed to a difference in the final result.

Right now the ONLY sensible thing to do IF the controls seem to be the primary problem is to extend the study monitoring for another 6 months and redo the statistics at 2.5 years.

We've come too far to start over if another 6 months would clarify it.
What about it @Southoz?
Would the trial statistics still be valid if they became significant again 6 months later?