Do go read it. It is well thought-through:
. . . .Seamus Fernandez and Kathryn C. Alexander note that because the researchers plan to publish their results in a a “top” medical journal, they believe the trial was not halted because of futility or trial design error. This suggests a “definitive” outcome, the pair write.
If Zetia received the superior result, then this would be a surprise, Leerink says. The prior data favors Niaspan, they believe. A pro-Niaspan result would have limited commercial reverberations — because so few people were enrolled in the study — unless they are published in a really big journal, Leerink says. . . .
Interesting. I actually think this outcome is likely as well. But my bet turns more on the PI's ethics, than on whether it is published in a so-called "really-big" journal. I think Dr. Taylor is simply following the rules -- strictly. And I think that is a good thing. We need more of it.
