Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Wow! The mention of NWBO is in the ETHICS DECLARATION of a board member. 😂😂😂😂😂
Not in the body, not in a PR, not in the title, not in the methods.
Congrats!
You know what you won’t ever find on www.cancer.gov? Any mention of NWBO.
Panic for what? I don’t own this and didn’t tell
friends and family to buy this. I actually like to make money in the stock market and keep my friends.
You should buy stock in UCLA because this shitty company wasn’t mentioned.
Nice bot spam.
News?
1) It doesn’t mention NWBO.
2) only one of the 4 placebo patients (that’s DCVax like the p3 trial) lived past 20 months. 2 died at around 7 months, and the 3rd at around 15 months.
3) They’re gonna actual have to run a full P3 with a control arm and this tiny p2 has already gone on a long time.
4) selection bias rules tiny P2 trials. It’s why so many look great and then add enough patients for a p3 with a legit control arm and it goes to shit.
You know that paper doesn’t even mention this crappy company, right?
You can admit you don’t understand all your copy and pasting.
I own multiple homes because I don’t throw my money away on crappy penny stock scams.
Or wait for Les to go on the Big Booz show and make shit up.
Volume speaks volumes.
I see it’s back to forgetting about the crappy 15 year old P3 trial and now hyping a tiny 10+ year mixed glioma P2 not powered to prove efficacy not even mentioning NWBO.
The new shiny object to distract from OS on the way to 2 BILLION shares and SP at .40 in a week or two.
When will idiot shareholders learn?
Did you ask why it doesn’t work?
That’s not the words of a person confident that this placebo will be approved.
She said the same thing 7 years ago.
It’s like she hopes and wishes just as skitahoe does.
Why did you not learn from that shitty scam? I even told you I did.
Rule one of biotech trading. Don’t make up for your loss in a bad investment by hoping another bad investment makes up for it.
You should have learned from that scam. I did.
DCvax has zero chance of of enrolling people in the PIP simply based on the number diagnosed with it at a young age. It’s. Another bullshit smokescreen from the company making rubes like you think they are moving forward. Buy some more infinite cheapies, moron.
In a sea of infinite shares, what’s 100 million? Oh yeah, it’s only 5% of what the OS will be in 4 months.
Actual value: $0
Just like death on DCVax. Inevitable.
Considering he is a known liar about NWBO data whom Liau had to correct. He used to always pass off pseudoprogressors as rapid progressors in the information arm presentations he gave and then when Liau gave them she said they were pseudoprogressors. Gee, giving DCVax to a bunch of pseudoprogressors and calling them rapid progressors makes DCVax look like it actually does something.
I think you meant "excuses", not "options". I guess for screwing shareholders she has many options. Nobody thought after she screwed shareholders by building out and selling Cognate that she would do it again and here you are paying for Advent to be LPs personal piggy bank.
Are you familiar with the drug approval process? It's not done with a 10 person trial of mixed indication patients.
There are a million tiny trials where the results are stunning. And then they never hold up in large trials because of the selection bias. They fail with a properly powered RCT like the DCVax P3 did. Wipe the breadcrumbs from your eyes.
What does anything you are babbling about have to do with the constant bashing of Optune when the same authors are found on both papers.
Again focus your response on what I said. Don't babble. If an oncologist contributed to the JAMA Optune paper and you all claim they are quacks and have actively sought to character assassinate them. then please admit you are hypocrites or just lying about oncologists who are not shills for NWBO.
So the author list is the end all, be all and means the treatment must work? Yet some of the same authors were on authors on the Optune paper which you idiots swear doesn't work even though it was approved. Which is it? Doctors want their names on papers. Papers of proven treatments AND failed treatments that never get approved.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2666504
Roger Stupp, MD1,2,3; Sophie Taillibert, MD4; Andrew Kanner, MD5; William Read, MD6,7; David M. Steinberg, PhD8; Benoit Lhermitte, MD2; Steven Toms, MD9; Ahmed Idbaih, MD4; Manmeet S. Ahluwalia, MD10; Karen Fink, MD, PhD11; Francesco Di Meco, MD12; Frank Lieberman, MD13; Jay-Jiguang Zhu, MD, PhD14,15; Giuseppe Stragliotto, MD, PhD16; David D. Tran, MD, PhD17; Steven Brem, MD18,19; Andreas F. Hottinger, MD, PhD2; Eilon D. Kirson, MD, PhD20; Gitit Lavy-Shahaf, PhD20; Uri Weinberg, MD, PhD20; Chae-Yong Kim, MD, PhD21; Sun-Ha Paek, MD, PhD22; Garth Nicholas, MD23; Jordi Bruna, MD24; Hal Hirte, MD25; Michael Weller, MD3; Yoram Palti, MD, PhD20; Monika E. Hegi, PhD2; Zvi Ram, MD5
Yes. My position is clear on the paper. Why aren't they all recommending their patients go to the UK for the excellent specials program that treats maybe 2 patients a year? What about the authors in the JAMA article that were also authors on the Optune paper that resulted in an actual approved treatment?
The majority of those listed on the JAMA paper are contributors, not authors, and have no other credits to their name. Because they were most likely an assistant who wrote up when the patient died.
Most oncologists understand the trial didn't prove shit because it was poorly designed, run, and changed after everyone was treated and the majority of patients died.
50% of total GBM patients were not represented in the trial based on inclusion/exclusion criteria so why would you assume 50% penetration? Even if one believed the numbers against a real control arm and not the bullshit ECA, the trial represented GBM patients with the best prognosis. Less than 30% total GBM population. And of those, the benefit is miniscule. Who do you think will pay for this? Not the MHRA.
So yeah, your numbers are pie in the sky bullshit. Might as well claim all of the UK population will get it for the prophylactic effect.
Those that thought this would go to $20 on approval when the OS was 100 million still think it will happen when the OS is approaching 2 billion. Math is hard I guess.
You should really research before opening your mouth.
https://www.adventbio.uk/post/customer-feedback-pepgen
https://www.adventbio.uk/post/customer-feedback-mesobank
I am sure there are many more that don't provide written feedback and just use the services of Advent.
Cognate is relevant because idiots like flipper for years posted job announcements, shipping labels, linkedin blurbs and other useless garbage trying to tie it to approval and yet nothing happened.
It's a shame the internet doesn't work over the ocean. I'm still waiting for my raven to return with my MHRA FOIA request.
Yes. CDMOs have clients. Advent has multiple for whom they create a products. Cognate had a head of Engineering and Facilities too. Both nothing to do with this POS.
No. If they did they are obviously deceased as nobody has heard anything from them. Thats usually bad news when you are hyping a treatment.
Polaroid had a ton of patents.
Outlive a death sentence? 331 patients in the trial with the vast majority deceased is not “outliving a death sentence”.
278 of 331 patients didn’t make it 4 years. And that’s from a highly selective patient population.
Everyone knows the endpoint was changed because of the futility recommendation based on the company’s own protocol.
Why is the company hiding the control arm data?
Probably that NWBO shareholders can fund yet another company of which they will see no benefit. Just like Cognate and Advent. Call it the LP Sucker Trifecta