Cancun, not to jump in (but I will!), and there are others obviously more knowledgable and elquent on the science .... but that was 5-point MACE and this is 3-point MACE, a much sicker population, looking at more seriously ill people. So, the RRR% could/should probably be much lower, I think? ... hence a lower end point target for meaningful-ness in the study design?

Much sicker patients, looking at time reduction to more serious life-threatening events, than when calculating 5-point MACE RRR?

Maybe I have some of that "logic" wrong though?!