@heavyphil The sources in those graphics are listed at the bottom of each. Yes, would be interesting to see if what they’re saying now aligns with the cited studies, or if they’re spinning the narrative.

The old adage has some truth - “Numbers will say anything you want them to if you torture them long enough.”

@heavyphil asked ❝ Aren’t these tables based on the data that the drug manufacturers are reporting?❞

My test is this: would the researchers have released the findings if they didn't go the way the funding drug company hoped?

In the case of a major phase 3/4 trial, it's virtually impossible to suppress results because major trials are announced in advance, discussed at public conferences at every stage (including before any results are known), and run by scores of researchers at different institutions over many years. If TITAN hadn't shown the result Janssen/J&J hoped for, for example, they might not have trumpeted the results in their PR, but they wouldn't have been able to prevent them from getting out.

A restrospective or other small study run by a single research team (inside or outside the company itself) is different: the pharma company may be able to apply enough soft pressure to influence more the way the research is done and prevent or stall release of unfavourable findings. I'm not saying they always (or even often) do that, but they *could.*