Like endotoxin filtering thru the hour glass....."these are the daze prepared for you Spectral holders" ; - ) .....
That said...does make you wonder...
#gohmmmmmmm????
whether the 62% mortality rate of those "
NOT entered into the Euphrates trial" were for the most part "culture negative"? I mean what other options would they have had? Furthermore, 62% mortality is perhaps one of the highest rates I've seen from any "septic discussion"....OH BTW, I always thought "
culture negative" was the theme of this
made for bullboard program...
Some people take longer to catch on than others .... Pre-PS - "poor Jonnie-bag-holder" ; - ) Important knew questions arising RE: phase 3 Euphrates...
So recently one of the planet's top sepsis experts ( top .0029% in some circles ) declared that >70% of sepsis patients with high endotoxin levels were "culture negative"...
In the Euphrates phase 3 trial we "knocked it out of the park" with this important subset of per protocol patients. We achieved a 21% absolute benefit or ~ double the 10.7% achieved on the 194 patients we applied to the current phase 3B trial...
My question would be why only 13% of patients ( 59 patients ) in the phase 3 Euphrates were "culture negative". ALL our patients had high endotoxin ( actually too high in many cases ) How does the recent number of >70% relate to the random selection and curiously low 13% in the phase 3 trial?
TIA for meaningful and thoughtful responses