Looking at the original paper, the author does the analysis looking at breakthrough drug trial design, but doesn't really talk about what...
Looking at the original paper, the author does the analysis looking at breakthrough drug trial design, but doesn't really talk about what it means. Of the 46 drugs approved under breakthrough designation, 25 were for oncology. The FDA often allows for a lot of flexibility with trial sign in oncology due to the high unmet need. The author mentions a lack of trials being double-blinded, having a placebo or active comparator and clinical outcome vs. surrogate marker. All of this is quite common outside of the breakthrough drug designation. Nothing new here. Double-blinding a trial isn't as big a deal when what you are measuring is not impact by observer bias (tumor size). In addition, if you're measuring a surrogate marker (that is an accepted proxy for clinical outcomes), you don't need a comparator arm. I don't think any of these findings should be all that surprising or concerning.
Posted by refurb on Aug 20, 2018, 6:02 PM
Tags
Related issues
- The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
- The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
- (My comment is about detached houses).
- The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
- > steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
- Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.4,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Other)
The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
NewThe biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
(My comment is about detached houses).
The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
> steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
> our Git monorepo was developing an annoying problem Sentences like this are so common from people using monorepos that I am convinced ...
Why is there no contact form?
Looking at the original paper, the author does the analysis looking at breakthrough drug trial design, but doesn't really talk about what...
Looking at the original paper, the author does the analysis looking at breakthrough drug trial design, but doesn't really talk about what it means. Of the 46 drugs approved under breakthrough designation, 25 were for oncology. The FDA often allows for a lot of flexibility with trial sign in oncology due to the high unmet need. The author mentions a lack of trials being double-blinded, having a placebo or active comparator and clinical outcome vs. surrogate marker. All of this is quite common outside of the breakthrough drug designation. Nothing new here. Double-blinding a trial isn't as big a deal when what you are measuring is not impact by observer bias (tumor size). In addition, if you're measuring a surrogate marker (that is an accepted proxy for clinical outcomes), you don't need a comparator arm. I don't think any of these findings should be all that surprising or concerning.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.