Good questions Golf and good info Polar One. Thanks.

So I hope someone can give insight re the renamed FA and n=188 for a sample size estimate. It sounds like at 188 depending on the statistical results the end target of 2400 could be adjusted, possibly up or down(???), if the reviewing committee sees the difference between test and control re efficacy will be deemed, for example, to require a larger sample for statistical significance at the RRR=30% level. Or if the 188 test vs control differences are very large perhaps a smaller sample will suffice???? I'm probably off base here.

Definitely Don's most comprehensive and clear presentation.

Gave me a very hopeful feeling and that the potential for this drug could huge.

Don gave no idea of when 188 will be hit and I still see the FA as the key hurdle.

Also great post by Aureus on IV. Thanks SF.

Glad to hear the LOI is still active. Was this part of the Q & A?

Great to here that scientific momentum is building - 5 papers and more to come.

No Christmas gift this year yet but great signs for the future.

GLTA

Toinv