The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.

Following on from Dr.EndoEP — and this may be the naive question:

What the phase 2 dropout pattern implies about how the phase 3 tolerability will read?

wendy_avl said:

Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.

Closing the loop on my own question.

Rereading it with the dropout table open changed my view. I still think it is the most interesting molecule in the pipeline; I no longer think the 24% is the number that will end up on a label.

LindaRN_retired said:

The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.

That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.