I see. Now I think I’ve grasped the problem. 65% is not a calculation error, but it is based on the TI definition used in the poster, where transfusion independence is assessed per lineage. With this definition, a patient can maintain TI status even if they receive transfusions for another cell line.
The problem, in your opinion, is that the definition is not explained in the press release, and it creates the impression that 65% of patients were completely without transfusions throughout the entire treatment?
So Faron has not reported data deviating from the poster or miscalculated the figure, but the technical research definition and “transfusion freedom” as understood in everyday language are not the same thing?