Misight vs Naturalvue, page-13

With the release of the more detailed analysis of the 1 year RCT results, we can do a bit of a speculative comparison to Misight for the distribution of effect sizes.

This table takes the data from the Naturalvue results, and compares them to the 3-year results given in the paper that results the 3-year RCT results for Misight previously posted (both data given below). I stress that this comparison is between 1 year results for Naturalvue and 3 year results for Misight, so it assumes that 1 year results for Naturalvue will hold in year 2 and 3 (as strongly suggested by the real-world data). This isn't a valid statistical comparison, so VTI wouldn't present the data in this way, but worth considering from an investor perspective.



From this comparison you can see that many more kids using Misight have a poorer outcome, and 32% have a very poor outcome. This would be the reason that ECPs would start to use Naturalvue more, and might favour Naturalvue over Misight.

On the downside, the 1-year Naturalvue results from the RCT have more than double the number of kids with a poorer outcome than the real-world results, defined as progressing > -0.25. Only 10% of kids in the real-world data progressed this much, compared to 26% in the table above.

It will be interesting to see how the real-world and RCT results are reconciled in the future, and very keen to the see the new study on real-world data from Thomas Aller that will hopefully appear soon.