I have been thinking more about this somewhat cryptic footnote...

I have been thinking more about this somewhat cryptic footnote put in presentation around time of last CR (July 24)

“Masked data from patients that have completed the week 52 visit in the ongoing Phase 3 clinical trials show greater mean BCVA increases from baseline than results with standard of care anti-VEGF-A monotherapy from Opthea's Phase 2b study**”


Firstly - it is unusual for company to make any kind of comment on masked data as prone to speculation so i think by making this comment they have probably internally recognised what this means.

It is clear monotherapy/comparator arms will perform fairly consistently over time given these drugs have been in market close to 20 years - the company would know the wet amd subgroups of patients completed 52w then they would have good historical data on how the monotherapy performs with that subgroup. By putting everything together, I deduce 52w monotherapy vs 24w standard of care/monotherapy will be more or less same - possibly waning over time due to up regulation of VEGF C/D for occult/minimally classic subtypes in particular.

The combo arms are clearly working as expected with BCVA 4+ well within reach.. if not 5+ letters