Read on Twitter
I learned something funny today and it was not about COVID or Politics or sports or getting fired from my job where I think I am still employed
I was on a call with a bunch of cardiologists and we were discussing risk-taking in clinical trial design. Someone mentioned PROVE-IT as an example of risk gone wrong. I was puzzled
For those who don't know, PROVE-IT was an RCT comparing high dose atorva to moderate dose prava in secondary prevention
I remember this trial so well from when it came out. I remember thinking it was a silly design. You take a lower dose of a low potency statin and compare to a higher dose of a high potency statin
And of course you get what you expect on the lipids
And you also get what you expect on the outcomes
And I distinctly remember thinking it was so outrageous that someone would allow Pfizer to sponsor this trial. It was so biased and the result was so obvious. It seemed so unfair to poor Bristol-Myers
So what did I learn today? Well it turns out that Pfizer was not the sponsor of PROVE-IT as I had assumed they were for 17 years. Guess who actually was...
As a post-script, it turns out that the inimitable @ronwinslow wrote a story in the journal about this and the impact it had at BMS. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB107876021684949151
I still can't believe I am just learning this
I still can't believe I am just learning this
