Recent content by Jack V

I have no idea why they are doing a Phase 2B trial because I don't know what they know. Maybe they've figured something out and are on the verge of a breakthrough. Maybe they're posturing for their investors. Hopefully the former, not the latter.

It impacts the whole study. After all, the liars weren't just put in the placebo cohort, they're also in the drug cohort. Therefore, if the drug worked, the liars get doubly boosted: whatever boost they get from the drug on top of the boost they get from the lie. But that didn't happen. There's...

Phase 2A drug and placebo groups saw improvements, and the same improvements, because they were both equally benefiting from the same flawed trial design. If the drug worked, you would expect to see improvements above and beyond the improvement experienced by everyone. It's the fact that...

There's a great deal of conjecture in this thread about what that "improvement" actually was, and I'm not sure there's anything productive about diving down that rabbit hole again. Drug trials often show early promise only to flame out in later, more rigorous trials. That's where we are with...

Thread's like a car, bro. Got to start it up from time to time or the battery dies. :cool:

What you describe (what happened) is exactly a drug showing no signal at all. If there's no advantage for the group receiving the drug above and beyond the bias boost impacting everyone, the drug has shown no signal.

Because bias, and the word score boost attributed to bias, was equally distributed between participants who received the drug and participants who received the placebo, if the drug worked, the group that received the drug would still score higher than the group that didn't because their scores...

The Phase I results have been consistently overblown in this thread. Calling a handful of people "super responders" who appeared to do well in an initial safety test is meaningless in light of a rigorous Phase II evaluation of almost 100 people in which the drug showed no signal - no difference...

No - the troubles with the outcomes appear on face value to stem from the fact that the drug didn't work. Everything else is conjecture.

I believe they said there was no difference between placebo improvements and drug improvements. Since no one knew if they got placebo or drug, both groups were equally impacted by bias, and both groups showed similar "improvement." Unfortunately, that's not a meaningless result. It suggests...

Suggesting that someone has to "believe in it" in order to weigh in sounds more like religion than science. This thread is, in many ways, about hope as much as it's about anything else – the thread that people return to in the middle of the night when they can't get back to sleep. But for it...

That would be wonderful, agreed. But they have yet to credibly establish even that. (To respond in advance: 3 people who showed word score improvements during an initial safety trial followed by a larger, more rigorous Phase II trial of almost 100 people that showed no FX-322 benefit whatsoever...

I think you should be neither optimistic or pessimistic, but rather realistic. Realistically, right now, there's no compelling evidence that FX-322 works any better than a sprinkle of sugar. However, the company continues to research it, and maybe they'll surprise and delight us with future...

Phase II results, with almost 100 participants, were devastating. FX-322 showed no signal at all, with no difference between drug and placebo. FX-322 simply worked no better than sugar water. Phase I, with a handful of participants, had a few that responded positively. In drug development...

Sure. Still, yours is a common position, widely expressed. And it's not lost on Frequency Therapeutics that a thread about the potential ramifications for tinnitus with FX-322 has been viewed over 1.5 million times.