This might be very important regarding Van der Maas Study

I think one thing that might be getting overlooked with the 16.8 month number is where the survival clock actually starts.
From what I understand, the paper defines OS starting from first relapse, which is earlier than when the patients actually got into CR2. So the 16.8 months could include the time it took them to go from relapse → salvage treatment → CR2. REGAL is different because patients are already in CR2/CRp2 when they’re randomized. So if we’re trying to compare this group to REGAL BAT, what we really want is survival starting from CR2, not starting from relapse.
What’s interesting is Van der Maas’ GitHub code looks like it has a variable called ttcr2, which seems to be time to CR2. So it looks like the data might actually be there to rerun those same 60 patients with CR2 as day 0. I think that post-CR2 median OS would probably be the most useful number we could get.
I’d also be curious about the median age/age distribution of those 60 patients, how long their first remission lasted before relapse, and what their ELN/cytogenetic/molecular risk and revised relapse-model risk distribution looked like. Those seem like the main things that could tell us whether this was an unusually favorable group compared with REGAL.