From my post on the SH board, asking for insight....

I have a solid background in Data Analytics yet fail to understand the scientific side of the 125 Event futility analysis.   I took it one step further and went through a very interesting read of an article published on Jan 2017 named; “The burden of major adverse cardiac events in patients with coronary artery disease”  

http://bmccardiovascdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12872-016-0436-7

I found the Results section very interesting as it relates to my background.   Segmentation is the key driver in understanding results.   A MACE event can occur for such a high number of reasons/variables as outlined in Table #1 and #2 of the article… which leads me to my question(s).

In my opinion (and excuse my ignorance for not understanding) BUT;

1. If RVX-208 was the “Holy Grail” of drugs and when taken – it did all the magical things, unclogging the arteries, causing patience to never have another MACE event….   Wouldn’t that be a good thing?  Meaning – the longer it takes to get to 125 the better?   What if we never got to 125 or 250 for that matter?

    

2. Furthermore (again my opinion) – a study of this kind, may be completely unfounded.  I would think that the Science professions would segment their population (people within the study) based on all the demographics (again see Results section, Table #1 and #2) to get equal representation of the study group BUT how can you really control all these factors?  I.e.: to name a few;  someone’s diet, hereditary background or how far along they are in their degenerative health ... it is absolutely impossible to predict what the nature of someone’s “true” health is…..  If we knew, we could predict the date of our own death. 

    

   I hope my points are clear and welcome your wonderful input!

    

   As usual … DYODD and GLTA.

    

   Long.