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.
ATLnsider
Re: Lykiri post# 539443
Sunday, November 27, 2022 4:02:11 PM
Post#
539470
of 539476
Thanks Lykiri, when the questioner asked Dr. Liau about a possible human study that combines DCVax-L + PD-1 + CSF-1R inhibitor, and whether are not UCLA had already done some mouse studies using this, Dr. Liau specifically said the following:
”great question, that is actually our next Spore project, we have a collaboration with BMS on a CSF-1R inhibitor”
Dr. Liau went on to say that “we do have some animals studies that showed a great response”
So, that tells me that the animal / mouse studies have already been completed.
As far as asking about this at the NWBio ASM, I don’t believe that NWBio is part of this collaboration because they are not providing any funding, nor are they producing any of the DCVax-L through CRL. I believe all of the DCVax-L was produced in the UCLA GMP lab on campus. So, I don’t believe Linda Powers will answer any questions related to this study.
However, I do believe that NWBio will be the Sponsor of the Phase III registrational DCVax-L + PD-1 inhibitor + CSF-1R inhibitor combo trial after DCVax-L is approved in the US, Canada, UK, Germany and the rest of the EU.
Bullish
BULLISH
0
Quick question that may clear up other’s preparations as well:
In the event of a new company starting, NWBO dissolves and our shares roll over, what happens to the short shares (whether naked or real, or fully-clothed)?
I understand they have to cover, however, here is my question:
If a ‘squeeze’ happens, and NWBO goes to, let’s say, $20 but the new company IPOs at $8 for an even swap of share count…does this leave us in the position of a decision to sell NWBO at $20/share before the new IPO opens because it has more ‘current’ value than the newer company at $8?
I’d like to see if I/we need to contemplate options of sell points if this is the scenario that may be created.
That’s the undying narrative everytime someone disagrees they have to sell the shares. lol. What’s the point of voting? what’s the point of ASM? If I disagree better sell my shares? what crap is that.
it'd be great if people read the replies to tweets before posting them here as questions.
If you read down further, this is for the renewal of LP and Dr. Malik's 3-year term.
— KnowWhatYouHold (@KnowWhatYouHold) November 27, 2022
when i "hate to say" things, sometimes i just don't and think about them to myself for a bit, in silence. i find this especially important when i don't have any evidence for my assertions...just something i have learned that i wanted to share to another NWBO long
The market will first have to decide if there is going to be intervening news and then how the vote will go.
If you’re right and as your post implies the market prices it in as bad news then I will probably buy a little more and I doubt I’ll be the only one.
Warren Buffet commented a number of years ago that Berkshire votes in support of management’s recommendation because they don’t want to interfere.
If they have a problem with a company/management that’s significant enough they get out of the investment.
Disrupting LP and Company’s plans now would be a self inflicted unforced error, and given what has now been accomplished and that nwbo has identified the remain8ng steps to approvals and executing them, I’m giving nwbo full support knowing their success is our success!
Thanks Lykiri, when the questioner asked Dr. Liau about a possible human study that combines DCVax-L + PD-1 + CSF-1R inhibitor, and whether are not UCLA had already done some mouse studies using this, Dr. Liau specifically said the following:
Dr. Liau went on to say that “we do have some animals studies that showed a great response”
So, that tells me that the animal / mouse studies have already been completed.
As far as asking about this at the NWBio ASM, I don’t believe that NWBio is part of this collaboration because they are not providing any funding, nor are they producing any of the DCVax-L through CRL. I believe all of the DCVax-L was produced in the UCLA GMP lab on campus. So, I don’t believe Linda Powers will answer any questions related to this study.
However, I do believe that NWBio will be the Sponsor of the Phase III registrational DCVax-L + PD-1 inhibitor + CSF-1R inhibitor combo trial after DCVax-L is approved in the US, Canada, UK, Germany and the rest of the EU.
Grip it and Sip It,
Shorts are definitely scrounging for shares so they think this is steak to chew on. If they cook it up right I might take a bite too; ). Best wishes.
martyDg,
Anyone really in for the long haul and for the patients is voting with Linda. Protest vote at this point with no additional news will be observed but powerless. You are along for the ride on this train to the launch pad or you can disembark whenever you wish. Moaning about management doesn’t get this treatment to patients any sooner than “the process” allows for. As one of our other posters has said “don’t do something, just stand there”; ). Best wishes.
If you'd like to dream about how big we could be some day, ask yourself how many Flaskworks units would be needed worldwide if DCVax-L and Direct became part of the SOC for most solid cancers. I think a good assumption to make is that each Flaskworks unit will make about 50 batches a year.
Gary
The media has policies about covering penny stocks and OTC stocks if they are unknown Penny stocks as a general rule. But they now seem really in oncology to apply the same rule across the board. They used to tell you which company and include their ticker. Today, even if it’s a big they often bury the name if they say it at all. It’s up to investors who are interested to figure out what drug and who makes it.
They’ve stopped promoting the companies in their reporting in breakthrough drugs. Adam’s bashing of companies in his coverage is therefore quite out of sync with general trends, I believe. There are a few other like him and some aspirants at Seeking Alpha. It’s deeply unethical in my view, but that makes him in theory a financial writer, not really a biotech writer, though he pretends to be a biotech writer which gives him more credibility with the unwitting. Very problematic.
ATLnsider
Followers 122
Posts 2503
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/03/2014
ATLnsider
Re: Lykiri post# 539433
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:43:24 PM
Post#
539438
of 539462
Lykiri, to me it sounded like the animal / mice studies had already been completed, and they saw very positive results.
Next, they (UCLA & BMS) wanted to study the combo in human trials, and that is what the new Bristol Myers Squibb collaboration is about. I encourage you to watch and listen to this video at around the 46:45 minute mark, and then let me know if you still feel like Dr. Linda Liau is talking about mice studies:
Bullish
BULLISH
ae kusterer
Re: None
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:38:54 PM
Post#
539435
of 539464
Lykiri
Re: ATLnsider post# 539427
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:33:15 PM
Post#
539433
of 539437
Thanks for the link ATLnsider.
Maybe they used Opdivo / Nivolumab (Bristol Meyers Squibb) in the pre-clinical mice study.Poor Man -
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=170545661
Followers 51
Posts 6908
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/30/2015
Poor Man -
Re: Kaizenman post# 539375
ATLnsider
Re: Lykiri post# 539393
Sunday, November 27, 2022 12:51:42 PM
Post#
539421
of 539435
Lykiri, never mind, I believe I have found the link you quoted. But, I would still like for you to answer the 2 questions I posed.
Also, I found this link below for the DCVax-L + Nivolumab + CFR-1R study for the UCLA + Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) collaboration it appears that the NIH also provided some funding for this study, and the money was budgeted and expended by UCLA:
https://reporter.nih.gov/search/cmeOHFTNlEGR3qDo7Efd5Q/project-details/9983047
Bullish
BULLISH
Sunday, November 27, 2022 12:06:29 PM
Post#
539398
of 539434
Kaizan,
My thoughts are that competitive bidding for the C would be more along the lines of a buyout. This appears to be headed to a more structured transaction with multiple partners for JVs.
There are three major deal groupings in play: The ownership rights to L; the partnership rights for L; and everything to do with the rights for Direct. That’s a lot of moving pieces and assets in play. The C has some role in all of that, plus a role in satisfying the price discovery requirements for an immediate listing.
One thought that comes to mind from your question is how do the BP participants involved in JV avoid anti-trust issues. For instance, if Merck and BMY had any discussions related to agreeing separate partnership rather than bidding against one another for a buyout, that might trigger a price fixing isolation. My guess is LP & LG proposed the conceptual structure for multiple partners, then everyone worked from that same sheet of music.
1 Like
ATLnsider
Re: Lykiri post# 539425
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:16:32 PM
Post#
539427
of 539435
Thanks Lykiri, I believe these are all different collaborations between UCLA, Merck (Keytruda / Pembrolizumab) and Bristol Meyers Squibb (BMS) (Opdivo / Nivolumab).
Also, I believe the studies are different, some combine DCVax-L + PD-1 inhibitor + CSF-1R inhibitor, and then others also add poly-ICLC
Did you have a chance to view this link?
https://reporter.nih.gov/search/cmeOHFTNlEGR3qDo7Efd5Q/project-details/9983047
Bullish
BULLISH
SkyLimit2022
Member Level
Re: HyGro post# 539432
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:40:58 PM
Post#
539436
of 539438
Thanks for posting your opinions.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2798847
https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/systems-molecular-and-integrative-biology/staff/michael-jenkinson/
Believe carefully. This is the greatest and most powerful lesson that I have learned since arriving on Earth. Examine what you believe about yourself most importantly, and then believe carefully as you interact with the world.
0
Not sure about the media policies, but the OTCQX market is the top OTC tier, with the most stringent entry requirements. Over 400 companies trade on the OTCQX including Roche.
No, I actually meant to say that Cofer's presents is unseen, things just happen and you never know he played a part in it, but he did. I really don't know how much help LP or others have needed in opening doors, but I believe a call or visit from Cofer will usually get the job done.
Gary
Nope, you read it correctly. He meant to say what he meant to say.
skitahoe "he won't have done it properly. " ??
Did you mean to say "he would have done it properly?
Does the media have different unwritten coverage policies for OTCQX stocks than OTC stocks?
I’m wondering if uplisting to the OTCQX market makes sense at this point. It may provide access to a much larger audience of institutional and retail investors. It would also demonstrate that NWBO meets the strict guidelines for listing, transparency and governance standards. Just a thought since uplisting to a major exchange is going to take some time. Could be a positive step forward to getting back on the Nasdaq.
PM, great analysis! Thanks always.
LOL!
The plan is working swimmingly! Can’t wait to see what the price looks like this week after the AS increase vote! I’m guessing back to $.70’s
Can Cofer help? Laughing
Often institutional ownership is double counted.
If Joe owns Joe Inc, and Joe Inc owns Joe's Fund then all 3 report as owners of the shares. Some services will not realize this and just add them all up.
I was long SGEN for several years back then and remember well these discussions.
Plus Mr Cofer has a lot of connection in the WH. Another plus is that he helped shut down the investigation into Hunter Biden doing @Burisma when Trump was in power.
A great person to have in the board of director, while Joe is president, thats for sure.
Right. My mistake. Thanks, hank.
If DCVAX-L is to be SOC like everyone is saying what would be the advantage of a partnership? Wouldn't all BPs have the right to use DCVAX-L along with their drugs anyway as long as they paid full price for it? Maybe the patent regarding combinations?
I suspect that if you learn what Cofer Black has done he won't have done it properly. I believe that Cofer Black knows how to get a lot of doors opened, but it's up to others to take advantage of getting inside.
Gary
Ex,
What you say is true, but I believe investors are not notified of their shares being lent if they're in a margin account, as mine are at Fidelity. Even if the shares have been loaned out I still get the proxy to vote on, which I do. I frankly don't know if Fidelity sees to it that more shares aren't voted than those actually owned, and I doubt if other brokerages do any more than Fidelity does about it.
I've not checked into it, but frankly I'm unsure if at any given instant I can get an accounting of whether my shares have been lent out or not. On the other hand if I agree to be paid for allowing my shares to be lent out I understand that I'll be notified if they have been. If I'm paid for lending my shares out I cannot vote them, but at least I know their status.
I frankly believe that the Brokerages know that many investors never vote their shares and that gives them the flexibility not to be overly concerned about more shares being voted than what's legitimately owned. It's frankly a lack of concern about naked shorts by the SEC that permits the flexibility the brokerages and MM's seem to have.
I previously mentioned SGEN, I have no idea how large the total naked shorting is, but for years the Institutional ownership has outnumbered the authorized shares, and there is no accounting for how many other shares are in individual accounts, but you know it's not zero. I have a belief that roughly 20 to 40% of their shares may be naked shorting, perhaps by the MM's. This has been the case for years, clearly the authorities don't care.
Gary
I’ll take a look at this later, but at quick glance this is basically the model for a spin-off that I brought up earlier.
There’s nothing new under the Sun. Whatever NWBO and BP want to achieve to divide up the pie, the models for the basic deal structures are already available to pull off the frozen food shelf.
It is possible to have a JV company with multiple BPs. Along the lines of this:
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer_announces_closing_of_joint_venture_with_glaxosmithkline_to_create_a_premier_global_consumer_healthcare_company
Another example is Merus NV. After it's IPO in May 2016 it traded in $7 handle. A few months later in August-September 2017 it rose rapidly to $30 plus over next six months when it became widely known that the MRUS stock was more than 70% owned by Pfizer and other BPs. So Merus NV is a JV including several BPs in the area of Immune-oncology.
Merus NV stated description of their business:
"Merus NV is the Netherlands - based biotechnology company, concentrated on developing differentiating therapeutics for cancer patients. The product programs in the Merus pipeline are based on the Multiclonics format. Its products are designed to bind to multiple targets, and are manufactured with features for anti-cancer effects against the complex mechanisms that drive cancer. Company's products engage cancer antigens and harness the power of the immune system to kill tumor cells by utilizing technology platform. One of the drug zenocutuzumab (Zeno), a Biclonics antibody, concentrates on helping patients with lung, pancreatic and other types of solid tumors. The company operates in the Netherlands and United States."
Imagine what would happen if NWBO, Merck and BMY join in a new venture to start a new company with Merck & BMY (or just one of them) capitalizing the new the new company with Cash and providing expertise and NWBO exchanges all of its stock and IP for shares in the New Company to to IPO on Nasdaq. Now imagine what would happen to any Hedge Funds that hold NWBO stock short? Imagine if the short shares were in the 100s of millions? Forced cover. If I was Linda Powers this is what I would do if there were BPs wanting to partner. Linda Powers is smarter than me and clearly by the "considering litigation" statement has an AXE to grind with the short selling "Wolf Pack"
> 3 million shares
Hank,
As I understand what's happened in other companies where more votes came in than shares outstanding they simply accepted them all and therefore accepted the outcome. This might not be the case if the outcome went against what the company wanted, but it didn't. I believe much the same would happen here.
If I were to agree to Fidelity's procedure for paying me for borrowing shares, I would lose my right to vote those shares. I will not set that up prior to this vote though my shares are in a margin account and could be lent without my even knowing it. As I understand the agreement, I can revoke it in the future, and have the shares be votable, and then reinstate it after the vote, so it's really not a bad plan to bring in some extra income. I'll wait until next year to put it in place, wanting to vote my shares I have little other choice.
I really wish the SEC would actively eliminate naked shorts and police MM's so they cannot maintain short positions over extensive periods of time. To me, investing should be based on expecting companies to grow, not working to bring them down. Clearly mine is an old fashioned notion, but I believe it's what all investment ought to be about. It's impossible for small investors to beat the computerized traders who can profit with either gains of losses in the market, you win if you have stocks that they too work to advance. I believe that NWBO is a stock that in time Institutions will take through the roof if it isn't bought out. If it is bought out it should be for a huge multiple of todays prices.
Gary
Speaking of Cofer Black... what's his role and what exactly has he done to earn his shares?
Summary of the Stock Option Awards
The 2020 Director Options are not currently exercisable because, as previously reported, they are conditional upon shareholder approval and they also have been subjected to voluntary suspension agreements. If approved by stockholders then, when the suspensions end, the 2020 Director Options will be exercisable for Common Stock of the Company at the market price of the Common Stock at the time of the Options awards?—?prices substantially higher than (and in some cases double) the market price of the Company’s Common Stock during most of the 2018, 2019 and 2020 periods for which the Options were awarded as compensation. In addition, the 2020 Options were subject to vesting requirements after they were awarded in 2020.
As previously reported, the 2020 Director Options comprise 5,710,891 options awarded to Mr. Jerry Jasinowski, 4,769,433 options awarded to Ambassador Cofer Black, and 15,732,288 options awarded to Dr. Navid Malik. The exercise price is $0.34 per share, and the exercise period is ten years from the time they become exercisable.
ATLnsider,
She talks about a collaboration with BMY. I don't know what it means. Perhaps a good question for next week's (Dec.5) Q&A session.
Define large shareholder please.
Nope, the markets are open on Dec 30 2022. The Bond market closes at 2:00 PM that day.
NWBO could PR any issue of that nature and maybe bring back in CREW.
Lykiri, to me it sounded like the animal / mice studies had already been completed, and they saw very positive results.
Next, they (UCLA & BMS) wanted to study the combo in human trials, and that is what the new Bristol Myers Squibb collaboration is about. I encourage you to watch and listen to this video at around the 46:45 minute mark, and then let me know if you still feel like Dr. Linda Liau is talking about mice studies:
I never really understood how voting works if you have a very large number of naked short sales. Presumably all (most) of the buyers from the naked shorts are unaware that their shares are not actual shares entitled to a vote and will presumably try to vote their shares just as any "legitimate" shareholder will. So when the company receives votes for say 150% of the outstanding shares, how do they adjudicate which are the legal votes and which to discard? If they can not distinguish, which is which, will that invalidate any vote at an ASM?
Same question for a BO. who gets money from the buyer as holding legit shares and who does not? In this case the shorts would probably be forced to cover or their brokers will have to pony up. But this does not happen for a run of the mill ASM vote.
Lykiri
Re: ATLnsider post# 539427
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:33:15 PM
Post#
539433
of 539437
Thanks for the link ATLnsider.
Maybe they used Opdivo / Nivolumab (Bristol Meyers Squibb) in the pre-clinical mice study.Poor Man -
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=170545661
Followers 51
Posts 6908
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/30/2015
Poor Man -
Re: Kaizenman post# 539375
ATLnsider
Re: Lykiri post# 539393
Sunday, November 27, 2022 12:51:42 PM
Post#
539421
of 539435
Lykiri, never mind, I believe I have found the link you quoted. But, I would still like for you to answer the 2 questions I posed.
Also, I found this link below for the DCVax-L + Nivolumab + CFR-1R study for the UCLA + Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) collaboration it appears that the NIH also provided some funding for this study, and the money was budgeted and expended by UCLA:
https://reporter.nih.gov/search/cmeOHFTNlEGR3qDo7Efd5Q/project-details/9983047
Bullish
BULLISH
Sunday, November 27, 2022 12:06:29 PM
Post#
539398
of 539434
Kaizan,
My thoughts are that competitive bidding for the C would be more along the lines of a buyout. This appears to be headed to a more structured transaction with multiple partners for JVs.
There are three major deal groupings in play: The ownership rights to L; the partnership rights for L; and everything to do with the rights for Direct. That’s a lot of moving pieces and assets in play. The C has some role in all of that, plus a role in satisfying the price discovery requirements for an immediate listing.
One thought that comes to mind from your question is how do the BP participants involved in JV avoid anti-trust issues. For instance, if Merck and BMY had any discussions related to agreeing separate partnership rather than bidding against one another for a buyout, that might trigger a price fixing isolation. My guess is LP & LG proposed the conceptual structure for multiple partners, then everyone worked from that same sheet of music.
1 Like
ATLnsider
Re: Lykiri post# 539425
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:16:32 PM
Post#
539427
of 539435
Thanks Lykiri, I believe these are all different collaborations between UCLA, Merck (Keytruda / Pembrolizumab) and Bristol Meyers Squibb (BMS) (Opdivo / Nivolumab).
Also, I believe the studies are different, some combine DCVax-L + PD-1 inhibitor + CSF-1R inhibitor, and then others also add poly-ICLC
Did you have a chance to view this link?
https://reporter.nih.gov/search/cmeOHFTNlEGR3qDo7Efd5Q/project-details/9983047
Bullish
BULLISH
SkyLimit2022
Member Level
Re: HyGro post# 539432
Sunday, November 27, 2022 1:40:58 PM
Post#
539436
of 539438
Thanks for posting your opinions.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2798847
https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/systems-molecular-and-integrative-biology/staff/michael-jenkinson/
Believe carefully. This is the greatest and most powerful lesson that I have learned since arriving on Earth. Examine what you believe about yourself most importantly, and then believe carefully as you interact with the world.
SO is there a consensus
as to the newly going to be authorized shares?
does it preclude buyout, does it indicate a buyout? a joint venture?
The company is cash strapped...are they just guaranteeing more funding?
Someone on stocktwits said something about no quiet period per IR conversation currently...claiming that it means no buyout or JV discussions...
I am not sure that is true since companies do JV etc without a formal quiet period they just don't discuss the JV but still discuss the science etc.
anyone?
thanks in advance.
Thanks for the link ATLnsider.
Maybe they used Opdivo / Nivolumab (Bristol Meyers Squibb) in the pre-clinical mice study.
Peer-reviewing is certainly not more rigorous than regulatory review that takes 10 months long.
Peer-review is dependent on what is provided by the author.
Managed publications was well versed on the AMA and their publications. Laugh all you want.
hyperopia, agreed and I am voting yes
GLTA
On another topic, there was a time when Pfizer might have considered buying BMY, and now, Merck is that big as well. Merck pays BMY like 10% or something for an old CI infringement matter. My point is, when I saw the 1.7 trillion M&A liquidity for large pharma, I couldn’t help but wonder if a larger mega package might be in the works.
Followers
|
1639
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
721581
|
Created
|
02/02/05
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators flipper44 sentiment_stocks CaptainObvious Poor Man - Doc logic JerryCampbell |
“Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
~ Winston Churchill
Stylized Dendritic Cell featured on NWBO board since 2015
- Dr. Linda Liau, PhD, MBA, Professor and Chair, Department of Neurosurgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
Clinical Trials
DCVax®-L to Treat Newly Diagnosed GBM Brain Cancer (NCT00045968) - Phase III (Double Blind)
UK (MHRA): DCVax-L to Treat Newly Diagnosed GBM Brain Cancer (EudraCT#) 2011-001977-13
DE (Germany - PEI): DCVax-L to Treat Newly Diagnosed GBM Brain Cancer (EudraCT#) 2011-001977-13
Expanded Access Protocol for GBM Patients with Already Manufactured DCVax®-L Who Have Screen-Failed Protocol 020221 (NCT02146066) (Expanded Access)
Safety and Efficacy Study of DCVax-Direct in Solid Tumors (NCT01882946) - Phase I/Phase II (Open Label)
UK Clinical Trials - Study of a Drug (DCVax®-L) to Treat Newly Diagnosed GBM Brain Cancer
EU Clinical Trials for DCVax-L - Phase III
Dendritic Cell Vaccine for Patients with Brain Tumors (NCT01204684) - Phase II - at UCLA - Randomized (Open Label) testing DCVaccine with Resiquimod and DC Vaccination with Adjuvant polyICLC
Pembrolizumab and a Vaccine (ATL-DC) for the treatment of Surgically Accessible Recurrent Glioblastoma - Phase 1 (NCT04201873)
Dendritic Cell-Autologous Lung Tumor Vaccine (DCVax-L) and Nivolumab in Treating Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma - Phase 2 (NCT03014804)
Dendritic Cell Therapy for Brain Metastases From Breast or Lung Cancer (NCT0368765) - Phase 1 - Collaborator: Mayo Clinic
Announcement of DCVax-L and Anti-PD-1 Monoclonal Antibody (Pembrolizumab) for Patients with Liver Metastases of Primary Colorectal Carcinoma Phase 2 Trial - November 17, 2016 - University Medical Center (UMC) of the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz
Cognate Bioservices - Owned by Charles River Labs
Website
Company Contact Info
Investor Relations:
Les Goldman (Company) (202) 841-7909 lgoldman@nwbio.com
Sign up for Northwest email list here (hit the subscribe to email list button in the lower right)
Company Headquarters
4800 Montgomery Lane, Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 20814 (240) 497-9024
NW Bio is developing cancer vaccines designed to treat a broad range of solid tumor cancers more effectively than current treatments, and without the side effects of chemotherapy drugs. NW Bio’s proprietary manufacturing technology enables them to produce its personalized vaccine in an efficient, cost-effective manner. NW Bio has a broad platform technology for DCVax dendritic cell-based vaccines.
Their lead product, DCVax-L, is currently in a 331-patient Phase III trial for patients with newly diagnosed Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the most aggressive and lethal brain cancer. This trial is currently underway at 69 locations thoughout the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom. NW Bio has also conducted a Phase I/II trial with DCVax-L for late stage ovarian cancer together with the University of Pennsylvania.
Their second product, DCVax-Direct, is currently in a 60-patient Phase I/II trial for direct injection into all types of inoperable solid tumor cancers, with trials currently being conducted at both MD Anderson Cancer Center in Texas, as well as Orlando Health in Florida.
They previously received clearance from the FDA for a 612-patient Phase III trial with its third product, DCVax-Prostate, for late stage prostate cancer.
DCVAX Survival Stories & Testimonials
Alice - Metastic Merkel Cell patient from Florida - ASCO 2018
Brad Silver - GBM patient from Huntington Beach, California - ASCO 2018
Sarah Rigby - GBM patient from Hong Kong - ASCO 2018
Kristyn Power - daughter of GBM patient from Canada - ASCO 2018
Kat Charles - GBM patients from UK - ASCO 2018 - as related by her husband Jason (Kat's Cure)
Prospective patients may contact NW Bio at patients@nwbio.com
UCLA Jamil Newirth DCVax-Patient Video - 2015
Allan Butler Video - National Geographic Vice President - DCVax-Direct patient from Phase 1 Trial with Pancreatic Cancer
NWBO - Patients Sunday Dennis and Jami Newirth - Enrolled at UCLA - Vimeo, Uploaded approx. May 2015
NWBO - Vaccine Helps Keep Brain Cancer Patient Alive (Jennifer Sugioka) - NBC Channel 4, Southern California, February 24, 2015
NWBO - National Geographic's Allan Butler Stage IV Pancreatic Patient using DCVax-Direct at MD Anderson
NWBO GBM Brain Cancer Survival Story of Mark Pace
Presentations
UCLA Agreements
Prostrate
DCVax-Phase II
DCVax-Booster
Upcoming Events
Videos
Linda M. Liau, MD, PhD, MBA - April 24, 2019 at University of Washington, Neurosciences Institute
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |