[Ip-health] Bayh Dole Rights, Size of Clinical Trials, 2004 Approvals

[Jon Merz]

At 7:10 PM -0400 7/13/06, Joseph DiMasi wrote:
>* * *  In any event, you asked about recent
>PAREXEL data.  To respond to that, I have looked at what PAREXEL
>reported for 2004.  The mean number of subjects was 2.6 times larger
>than what Mike Palmedo reported for 2004 in his original message.
>However, you were asking about relative trial sizes.  Your numbers on
>trial sizes have standard drugs with a mean trial size that is 71%
>higher than the mean for priority drugs.  However, the PAREXEL data have
>standard drugs with a mean trial size that is only 23% higher.  You had
>trial sizes for 16 drugs for 2004.  Thirteen of these 16 drugs overlap
>with the PAREXEL data.  For those 13 common drugs, your data have a mean
>trial size for standard drugs that is 87% higher than the mean for
>priority drugs.  However, the PAREXEL data have the standard drugs in
>this group of 13 with a mean trial size that is only 23% higher than the
>mean for priority drugs.  This, I think, is a fairly significant
>difference in the ratios.
>


this has become uninterpretable to the casual observer. can you give
us a table of the parexel data?

thanks,

jon merz
penn bioethics
and
cptech