Ann: Trading halt, page-388

My money is on news relating to the COVID ARDS trial. The unusual pause followed by a trading halt suggests something unexpected (ie out of MSB’s control). A DSMB recommendation would fit the bill.

The timing is also about right. To gauge this, I note that the trial surpassed 50% enrollment on 13 October, and SI said the trial had surpassed 2/3rds enrollment in a Fox News interview on 23 November. This indicates that at least 50 patients were enrolled in 42 days. We can only guess when 60% enrollment occurred (30 patients beyond 50% enrollment). At the rate of 50 patients in 42 days, this means 30 patients may have been enrolled in about 25 days. Let’s say 28 days to allow for some acceleration between 60% and 2/3rds enrollment. This would indicate that 60% enrollment may have been reached around 28 days after 13 October, being 9 December (or just over a week ago).

If it is related to the COVID ARDS trial, my guess the news is positive (overwhelming efficiency). I don’t think a TH would be required if the trial was stopped for futility (but this could be wrong, as they used a trading halt to deliver bad news about the GVHD CRL).