NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[biosectinvestor]

Your point here is speculative, it seems, and inconsistent with the methodology of prediction and mathematics as a whole. No doubt they will have some ability to discuss the crossover arm, and enough patients to say that it was safe, and likely delve into further details to determine if patients who were in that status had some benefits, from also being given the treatment. And as was said, the eventing for them was at the moment that the GBM recurred. Everything after that is good additional data, done compassionately and at the request or with permission of the FDA. I don't see that hurting anyone.

The end result will be that they have more data than less that can always be used and given to doctors to use when addressing different patients at different stages. Those doctors will, therefore consider DCVax not just for the newly diagnosed, assuming approval, but also for those who have had other treatment and then find themselves again contemplating treatment options.

As RKM and others have indicated, which seems to be ignored by the critics, the crossover patients tended to come back with mesenchymal type tumors, which had the best prognosis for DCVax, ironically. So I suspect, as they've delved and as they delve into more and more data, the issues will become far clearer than your suggestion of one and done, flat and very uncurious and mechanically undynamic review of limited notions of data would suggest.