It was also reported in the Telegraph. John’s onco was involved in a related part of the trial, where all men were offered adjuvant RT after RP and he told us that it was looking very successful so my guess is that it was only when they made the comparisons with men that hadn’t had ART that they realised.
The way it was reported in the Telegraph, the comparison wasn’t that men who had ART had worse outcomes at 5 years than men who had SRT ... it was that men who had ART did worse at 5 years than men who didn’t ... so I need to go and read the actual PR I think