Just out today in the New England Journal of Medicine, Ivocydenib and Azoidine and IDI-H-1 mutant AML.

This is the paper you've been waiting for.

It's the Agile Study, and it's the study that aims to move Ivo-Sidinib into the front line in AML in older,

frailer people who cannot tolerate intensive induction therapy.

Now, I have not had that much time to read this paper.

I've had about an hour to read the paper, get into the supplement, get into some of the history,

but I've already found so many things, so many things.

This is my prelim read. I've got to get it out there.

I have to get it out there because this is really one of the worst papers I've ever seen.

You'll already see why. I've got at least six problems in this paper,

and you will see why. And I'm going to show you with the series of illustrations. Number one,

a little bit of a timeline. Let's run through the timeline. The timeline is key. This randomized

control trial of azocidine and ibocidin versus placebo azicidine occurred and started enrolling in March of 2018.

That's when the accrual starts.

And the accrual was meant to accrue 392 people for a primary endpoint of overall survival

and it needed 278 events.

And at the time it launched, I think that sounds to me quite good.

Proved to me in somebody who's ineligible for

intensive chemotherapy up front that if you add Ivo Citadem and IDH1 mutant AML, that you will have

a survival benefit over just A's alone, which is the standard of care at the time it started

enrolling. They needed 278 events. They were going to wait for 90-some events for the first

interim analysis. Then,

...