View Single Post
Old 05-03-2009, 10:38 AM
lady_express_44's Avatar
lady_express_44 lady_express_44 is offline
Grand Magnate
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,300
15 yr Member
lady_express_44 lady_express_44 is offline
Grand Magnate
lady_express_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,300
15 yr Member
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Z View Post
This being true and all MS drug trials basing their results on the number of lesions they see on MRIs, what does this say about the accuracy of the trial data? Just a thought.

Harry
I agree, Harry . . . lesions (and/or relapses) are probably not a good measure of efficacy. In fact, I don't think # of lesions are even a legitimate measure, are they? Isn't the primary measure a reduction in disease progression (as measured by our EDSS), and secondary, a reduction in relapses?

I think this is just a new way to try to market the efficacy of our meds . . . "More patients are disease-free with X med". What the he!! is "disease-free" . . . guess that means we are cured, huh?

Lesions, no lesions, inflammation, no inflammation, 3 months of good EDSS results . . .

TIME will tell.

Cherie
__________________
I am not a Neurologist, Physician, Nurse, or Hairdresser ... but I have learned that it is not such a great idea to give oneself a haircut after three margaritas
.
lady_express_44 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote