Very true. The differentiator is that ZLD's HOPE1 product (used...

Very true.

The differentiator is that ZLD's HOPE1 product (used in the ASD trial below) is a 1:1 THC:CBD ratio whilst NTI164 is less than 0.3% THC and has cannabidiolic acid (CBDA) as a major constituent and some minor CBD's and terpenes as "entourage" actives.

ZEL040-White-Paper_Hope_FA.pdf (zeliratx.com)

A comparison of the two trials is possible, although the ZLD trial didn't document statistical significance and maybe that trial was not powered to do so.

Both did use CGI-S measures to assess patients at baseline and both groups of patients in the trials were determined to be markedly ill.

NTI continued the CGI-S measure during the trial and after 8 weeks identified a statistically significant reduction from 5.54 to 3.77 ( a drop in the 7-point scale from Markedly/Severe to Moderate/Mild. Curiously the ZLD paper doesn't report any CGI-S result.

CGI-I was reported by both. NTI after 8 weeks dropped from 4.0 to 2.62 with 46% of patients being in the very much improved or much improved category. ZLD after 5 months claimed 100% of patients in the much improved category.

I think that Epidiolex (active ingredient cannabidiol - CBD) may be a better comparator for NTI164.