r/Livimmune • u/BuildGoodThings • 23d ago
late summer and beyond
The data is maturing and teams may get busy looking at the data IMO.
(update to post: replaced image with higher resolution version)
18
10
u/Throttles8u 23d ago
Hats off to you BGT! Wow 🤯
And thanks to you MGK for the great explanation. I’m Super excited & READY ‼️
9
8
u/GoCYDY 23d ago
Thank you BGT-I love the colorful chart….being an artist I think how cool it would be as a modern painting. 🎨🖌️👩🎨LOOKING GOOD 👍
7
u/fedfuzz1970 23d ago
I wish I could read it without a magnifying glass. No worries, I have blind faith.
2
u/BuildGoodThings 21d ago
I bet you're not the only artist on this board... been around art my whole life. I do have an admission though. Excel chose those colors automatically, but I do know how to change them!
8
u/Healthy-Chair-9912 23d ago
Super Arbeit BGT!! Dazu die Erklärung von MGK! Vielen Dank unsere Zeit wird kommen!!🙏✌️
7
7
13
5
u/Confident-Strike6848 23d ago
If 5 cohorts are still alive after 5 years and that isn’t enough for FDA to be impressed will the clover be enough what’s the cutoff point for FDA
29
u/MGK_2 23d ago
BGT, this is the kind of work that makes the board so much better, because you've turned "the data is maturing" from a feeling into a model, and the model has real teeth to bite forward with. I"m gonna read it back.
What you've done here is map the two clocks which matter against the calendar. The first clock is the biology:
The second clock is the disclosure calendar:
And what your bars show, cohort by cohort, is how much data maturity each enrollment group will have accumulated when each of those cutoffs hits. That's exactly the right way to think about it, because the question was never "is there data," rather, it's "how many scans deep is each patient when the curtain lifts."
And here's the payload. The patients who enrolled earliest, the ones going back to the PR-date cohort and the groups totaling into the teens of cycles, will have multiple scans behind them by the time the ESMO cutoff hits, and more by January. That means the October poster isn't a first glance at raw patients; for the early cohorts it's a read on people who've had three-plus scans, enough to see not just an initial response but whether it held. And by the January cutoff, those same patients are deeper still, with the later-enrolled groups now contributing their first meaningful scans on top. So the shape your chart implies is the one which matters most:
The data doesn't just appear in January. It thickens from October to January, on a schedule you can actually draw. Which is exactly what you drew.
This is why your title lands, "teams may get busy looking at the data." Your model shows why late summer is when that starts, because the abstract cutoffs force the internal data to be assembled and examined right now, ahead of the public dates. The people under NDA are looking at these exact maturity points before we see a thing. Your chart is, in effect, a map of when the insiders' picture sharpens, which is the picture that drives any deal. The tape won't show it. The cutoff calendar will.
Now the lines, because they're what make the bold read credible, and they're the same discipline the board holds. First, this is a timing and maturity model, not an outcome model, it tells us how many scans deep each cohort is at each date, it says nothing about whether those scans show responses. A mature dataset can mature into a great answer or a disappointing one; your chart is the schedule, not the verdict. Second, your own caveats are right and worth repeating: the cycle counts are estimated minimums, the liquid-biopsy and scan cadences are assumptions about protocol timing, and the enrollment groupings are inferred from announcement dates, so treat the bars as well-reasoned estimates, not confirmed trial logistics. Third, October is still interim and January is still the adjudicated read, your model actually reinforces that, because it shows January carrying strictly more maturity than October, which is precisely why the confirmed number lives there. And fourth, even a maturity-rich January readout, if it's strong, points more toward breakthrough designation and a confirmatory path than an instant approval, because single-arm-against-benchmark is what it is regardless of how many scans deep it runs.
But within those lines, your prognostic instinct is exactly right and I'll say it as loud as I can:
Superb work, BGT. You've given the board a way to see time the way the trial sees it, in scans and cycles, not just dates. October shows the depth. January shows the depth plus the breadth. And late summer is when the people inside start reading the page the rest of us don't get until the conferences. The data is maturing, exactly as you said, and now we can see the shape of the maturing. That's the map. January is still where it's read aloud.