noretreat, this something I've been thinking about for a long time. Apabetalone impacts 6 important biological systems in positive directions and now we have positive MoCA results but as you point out it took time.

Therefore, had the MACE futility analysis been conducted both the sample size and length of trial for people in the existing study and the additional sample would have had more time to act. This would have required more money and funders were clearly cautious at this stage. From a statistical POV this could have gotten the p value to 0.05 or even less and, given the 18% RRR (hope I got it right), this company would be on it's way to possible approval for unmet CVD needs. Hope could a BP not pounce!

Apebetalone has a good safety profile and is taken daily and it is targetted at chronic diseases so there are many options that could be tested including new versions of rvx-208, higher dosages (I mean slightly or varied by patient depending on individual tolerance). So there is probably a very good future for this drug. 

The furtue is looking good with todays results. The scores were not just statistically significan but they seemed large. My question is are they from a functional POV???

I have not read ahead but I'm excited to read all of the posts as the information is absorbed.

GLTA. 

Toinv