Hi Fouremm,

As much as I would have liked to consider other possibilities, I think the title of the slide answers the questions: "Limitations of the CKD study".

There was no difference over time in eGFR in CKD patients.

That said, "difference", when uttered by a scientist does not necessarily carry the same meaning as when used in every day language. "Differences" for scientists tend to be statistically significant, thus there may have been a trend, but it was just not statistically signficant.

If there was absolutely no difference, it a bit surprising that Resverlogix (according to the fact sheet) has planned a trial aimed at looking improvements in renal function in low eGFR patients. They may have seen a sign/trend/glimmer of hope supporting an eGFR improvement claim, but that kind of detail is not something retail investors are privy to.

Tundup, if you are reading this, I understand that you felt the information you received some time ago on eGFR data was misleading, but can you add a bit more in terms of circumstances of the information you received - some hypotheses on why you heard what you heard?

Best regards,

BKC