Hi Roselette You said: Here's hoping They might be presenting...

Hi Roselette
You said:
Here's hoping They might be presenting updated data on the other trials now we've had final CALM results. (Well, mostly final - there will eventually be the results of the follow up and they'll keep observing patients for some years for long-term outcomes, eg actual median survival since currently >50% of patients are alive etc.) Of course, to be devil's advocate, it could just be to give people 2 weeks notice of the conference so it fits into people's diaries...

This 50% figure is critical.
What’s confusing to me is that at first glance the limited info we are getting suggests contradictions.
Until all 57 patients have been on Cavatak for at least 30 months makes the Kapler curve very difficult to use & compare with that published for TVec stage 2 trial –reported  by Senzer.
I want to ask you how you derived your ≥50% figure and if it’s same as my understanding - below.
If I assume all the supplied data is accurate, my interpretation below supports that assumption:
But I’m wondering if it’s the same as your logic - or have I missed something.
Check this out:
The total 57 patients on the stage 2 trial received their first Cavatak dose over a staggered time window – over Feb 2013 to March 2014 – approx.
VLA Rpt. 2/6/2014 stated that 21 patients out of 33 survived for 1 year after first Cavatak dose.
But earlier VLA reports show the 33 were not all enrolled or received their first dose on the same date.
Anyway, as at June 2014, 33 had been on Cavatak for “at least” 12 months .
So that info tells us that at June 2015, those 33 candidate patients had been receiving Cavatak treatment for at least (note: “at least”) 24 months.
But we are told the median overall survival time is 26 months.
Now I’m presuming that means that, in fact, about 33 patients had been on Cavatak for longer than 24 months - ie.  for 26 months, and, as of last week,  50% (16 -17 patients) of those had died.
Accordingly,  the fate of the balance of patients  (57 – 33) have not been considered in that survival figure – and that’s how you have arrived at  your ≥50% figure????
That is 16 + (57-33) > 50% of 57
Hope that's clear.
Cheers