Re:Faecal transplant effectively treats recurrent or unrespo...
by morsch on Friday November 24, 2017 @08:13PM
(#15773891)
But there was a difference in the other group, right? Isn't that still relevant? The study's authors certainly seem to think so. I've only read the abstract.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Faecal transplant effectively treats recurrent or unrespo...
by cpncrunch on Friday November 24, 2017 @09:40PM
(#15774133)
Yes, that group had a 40% placebo rate vs the 90% placebo response of the NY group. However it is a very small group, and only marginally significant. It needs a larger, better designed study (preferably one which objectively measures c.diff infection status before and after), but if one study fails to show a response that's a pretty good indication that the treatment is suspect.