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.
PharmaCyte Biotech's Improved Technology Attracting World Class Oncologists
NEW YORK, NY--(Marketwired - July 30, 2015) - PharmaCyte Biotech (OTCQB: PMCB) is a small international biotechnology firm, but you wouldn't know it by the company it keeps. How does PharmaCyte keep landing such world-renowned oncologists? Well, we think the answer is simple -- proven technology that has only gotten much better over time! The latest name to join PharmaCyte is Dr. Manuel Hidalgo, a renowned clinical and laboratory investigator in both pancreatic cancer and other abdominal cancers. He was recently named to the company's Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), and his appointment prompted a deeper look into the technology and the names involved with it.
Worldwide experts like Dr. Matthias Löhr of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, and Dr. Daniel Von Hoff of Translational Drug Development or TD2 in Scottsdale, Arizona, have been attracted to PharmaCyte's pancreatic cancer treatment in one way or another. Dr. Manuel Hidalgo now makes up three of the top names in the world in pancreatic cancer. All three have expressed an interest in helping PharmaCyte develop a treatment that will help pancreatic cancer patients and patients of other solid abdominal cancers.
After seeing yet another high profile oncologist join the growing list of experts that PharmaCyte has attracted of late, we decided to explore the improvements to the Cell-in-a-Box® technology that is at the heart of PharmaCyte's myriad treatments in cancer and diabetes. For these answers, there is no better source than Prof. Dr. Walter Günzburg, who is PharmaCyte's Chief Scientific Officer and the Chief Technology Officer at Austrianova where Cell-in-a-Box® was created and where the technology has matured over the last decade.
First things first, let's keep in mind PharmaCyte's pancreatic cancer treatment, which combines low doses of the chemotherapy prodrug ifosfamide with the Cell-in-a-Box® technology, has already performed remarkably in 2 separate human clinical trials in advanced pancreatic cancer. It has performed so well, in fact, that the results bested data produced by Eli Lilly's Gemzar® or gemcitabine, the current single agent "gold standard" for pancreatic cancer.
These results were produced before the improvements that PharmaCyte's partner, Austrianova, made to the technology. Cell-in-a-Box® is a live-cell encapsulation technology made up of tiny pinhead-sized capsules that are each filled with about 10,000 live cells genetically engineered to activate ifosfamide (in the case of PharmaCyte's pancreatic cancer treatment) right at the site of the tumor. With a technology that has already produced excellent data in clinical trials, the improvements to Cell-in-a-Box® should prove promising for any of PharmaCyte's future clinical trials in both cancer and diabetes.
We'll discuss 3 areas where Cell-in-a-Box® is a better technology today than it was when it was used in clinical trials in advanced pancreatic cancer. The first such improvement has been to the way Austrianova manufactures and synthesizes the material used to make Cell-in-a-Box®. As Dr. Günzburg points out, the material used in the technology is a proprietary material that Austrianova has the patents for and no one else can copy.
The material is not commercially available, and Dr. Günzburg says it's a very reproducible synthesis process, which means Austrianova has complete control over how the polymer comes out. "You need to have that for a medical product, you need to be able to say that every time I make it, it's going to be the same to a very small tolerance."
It is the material that separates Cell-in-a-Box® from other cell encapsulation technologies, but it is the genetically modified cells that are living and working inside the capsules that make Cell-in-a-Box® effective in treating solid tumors and diabetes. And, to that end, Cell-in-a-Box® is much more potent today because of improvements made to filling the capsules.
Dr. Günzburg said, "When we first started we were filling these capsules and they weren't really full, there were cells in there and they were working, but they weren't full. Nowadays every single time -- every capsule is totally full. We know exactly how many cells are in there, and those cells are producing the enzyme, which is required to convert the drug, the prodrug ifosfamide in the case of PharmaCyte's pancreatic cancer treatment, to its active form. The product, let's say, is much more active than it used to be because we've got a lot more cells in there -- we've got a totally full capsule."
With an improved manufacturing and synthesizing process and the improvement of filling the capsules that make up Cell-in-a-Box®, with many more live cells, which should make the technology much more active and potent, the final piece is to improve the ability to mass produce and store the capsules so that they don't have to be used immediately upon production and can be used at a later time, as well as shipped all over the world. This brings us to the third improvement made by Austrianova to Cell-in-a-Box® -- the ability to freeze the product.
Dr. Günzburg commenting on this vital improvement said, "In the old days we produced the product, and we used it directly in patients -- we weren't able to stockpile it and keep it for any long periods of time. Today, however, we have a freezing protocol that's a proprietary protocol. It's a way in which we can actually keep the frozen capsules for long periods of time. We've gone over 5 years now in the freezer. So, when the patient comes in, you just take out the vial, thaw it and use it directly on the patient. This is something we couldn't do before, but something you really need if you want to make a viable medical product."
These 3 improvements are most likely going to help PharmaCyte produce the same, but most likely even better data from its upcoming clinical trials to treat advanced pancreatic cancer and to treat pain and malignant ascites, two debilitating symptoms associated with pancreatic cancer and other solid abdominal tumors. And it could very well be future expectations that are drawing in worldwide experts who want to work with this unique and proprietary technology in one way or another.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/PMCB/news/PharmaCyte-Biotech-s-Improved-Technology-Attracting-World-Class-Oncologists?id=110900&b=y
Thanks for the reply.
Come on Fros, I thought you liked an open conversation. We have talked about diluting, what about naked shorting? How does the recent shorting activity affect the pps? What do shorts need to do to cover? Don't they have to buy those shares and wouldn't they want to do it as low as possible?
That does make sense. I can see how dilution can do that.
Now, how does naked shorting work? How does this recent increase affect the pps?
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/PMCB/short-sales
There was no blame here. It is simply a question. Can you answer it? With 47% short interest today and more buying than selling, could it be naked shorts covering?
No doubt naked shorts are here...
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/PMCB/short-sales
Could it be naked shorts buying to cover?
It is especially curious on days where the purchases outnumber the sells. How does that happen?
http://ih.advfn.com/stock-market/USOTC/pharmacyte-biotech-inc-PMCB/trades
I wonder how an IND will be filed considering they have a whole team to study the New Drug Application. CiaB is not a drug and I wonder if it will be filed as a delivery method.
I also wonder if how we file it will have future implications for its ongoing use, like using it to deliver other drugs besides ifosfomide.
Here is a very interesting ebook on microencapsulation which is edited by Dr Eva Maria Brandtner, heads our Diabetes Consortium, and Dr John Dangerfield, Austrianova.
http://ebooks.benthamscience.com/book/9781608057207/
Grear DD JDT! Here is more info on the NICE decision...
NICE 'no' for Celgene's Abraxane in pancreatic cancer
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has published new recommendations rejecting the use of Celgene’s Abraxane (nab-paclitaxel) on the National Health Service to treat patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.
According to the cost regulator, the drug, a novel formulation of the chemotherapy paclitaxel, is not as effective as standard therapy and is more expensive, and thereby fails to hit value-for-money criteria.
NICE says that data provided by Celgene show that the chemo regimen FOLFIRINOX, a first-line option for patients with the disease, was actually more clinically effective than the Abraxane/gemcitabine combination. And while Abraxane/gemcitabine was more effective than gemcitabine alone, it resulted in more serious side effects.
Ultimately, the most plausible cost per QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Year) gained for Abraxane/gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone was calculated at £78,500 per QALY gained, and thus far above the normal bounds of what is considered a cost-effective use of NHS resources (up to £50,000 in certain life-extending circumstances).
Noting the limited progress in the development of new pancreatic cancer treatments, NICE chief executive Sir Andrew Dillon said while a number of newer treatments including Abraxane have been introduced, it is disappointing that “when considering the impact of side effects as well as how effective the treatment is the evidence fails to show that it works any better for patients than other treatments already provided by the NHS”.
Equal access
Patients with pancreatic cancer in England could still get access to the drug via the Cancer Drug’s Fund, after Abraxane was added to its list of approved treatments earlier this year.
Celgene, however, is still urging NICE to re-consider its preliminary recommendation so that metastatic pancreatic cancer patients in England will have the same unrestricted access to Abraxane as patients in Wales, where the treatment is currently recommended for use.
“This is very disappointing news for both clinicians and patients, particularly considering the poor survival rates and the limited number of treatments that are currently being developed in pancreatic cancer,” said Professor David Cunningham, Consultant Medical Oncologist, commenting on the draft guidelines. “If this negative preliminary recommendation is upheld…it will mean that NICE has not recommended any new treatments for pancreatic cancer in well over a decade,” he added
http://www.pharmatimes.com/Article/14-09-09/NICE_no_for_Celgene_s_Abraxane_in_pancreatic_cancer.aspx#ixzz3m1htHtb4
Not only that, it is a common practice of most small biotech's.
This practice is a turn off for big investors who wait for major milestones to be accomplished before investing, like promising human trial endpoints, when the price gets out reach for most retail investors.
However, at under a dime a share, it is a great opportunity for small investors who see the potential in this revolutionary technology, Cell in a Box(R). That is one of the reasons I accept the risks with the upside potential here. I think Dr Von Hoff will take Cell in a Box(R) to market for oncology and we just may cure type 1 diabetes without the need for immunosuppressants.
http://www.pharmacytebiotech.com/media/
I agree, bull. This is a very high level plan. Just goes to show how strong are the teams associated with PMCB.
I know what you mean Promised Land. I liked this one from the beginning. There has been so much progress over the last 18 months and we are on the verge of starting some very important human trials with the magic bullets. :)
That's pretty cool. I bookmarked it, :)>
Nice, I love all the DD links at the bottom! Thanks, Bio...
That was a nice touch, Bull. :)
Imaging Endpoints... Check out the video on the link below as well. Really nice to have them working with us in our upcoming 2b...
Pre-Study
The imaging Endpoints team, comprised of some of the most experienced industry experts and former FDA leaders, identifies the best imaging for your trial, assists in protocol development, generates all study documentation and standardizes image acquisition across all clinical sites. We specialize in setting up all required systems and procedures to enable real-time image QC, query resolution, reads and reporting. We emphasize training and establish metrics that ensure your performance requirements are constantly measured, reported and met or exceeded.
During Study Conduct
Imaging Endpoints collects images real-time from sites globally and our radiology technologist perform image QC and query resolution until the query is resolved. We track and report clinical site performance metrics real-time and quickly retrain clinical site staff to minimize protocol variances.
Through an imaging clinical trial management system (iCTMS), state-of-the-art analysis software, in-house radiologists and expert data management, we provide real-time reads and rapidly report the results to you. We leverage our easily customizable iCTMS and superior project management to report monthly progress metrics that meet your exact requirements.
Post-Study
At the end of your trial, Imaging Endpoints provides secure transmission of all image data in the format you require. Included are data clean/lock, long-term data storage (with on-site and off-site daily backup) as well as transfer of all images with viewing software. We write the imaging components of regulatory submissions, and our medical, scientific and statistical experts generate the most advanced imaging analysis reports in the industry.
http://www.imagingendpoints.com/about/what-we-do
PharmaCyte Biotech's Cancer Treatment Shows "Complete Tumor Remission" in Published Preclinical Study
NEW YORK, NY--(Marketwired - June 03, 2015) - PharmaCyte Biotech’s (OTCQB: PMCB) signature live-cell encapsulation technology, Cell-in-a-Box®, was the star of the show in a recently released corporate video by the company. In that video, PharmaCyte revealed that its cancer treatment of Cell-in-a-Box® plus low doses of the anticancer drug ifosfamide was able to produce “complete tumor remission in all animals” that received the treatment on days 2-6 of a previously published preclinical study.
It was a study that used a colon cancer model to treat malignant ascites, a fluid that is common with abdominal cancers like pancreatic, colon, ovarian and liver cancer that accumulates in the abdominal cavity and causes painful swelling of the stomach. In PharmaCyte Biotech’s corporate video (www.PharmaCyte.com/media), renowned gastroenterologist and oncologist, Dr. Matthias Löhr of the famed Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, says that he and a team of doctors and researchers found that they “could virtually cure malignant ascites” in this study.
Readers can find the published preclinical study in Cancer Gene Therapy here: http://www.nature.com/cgt/journal/v13/n1/full/7700849a.html
The preclinical study, commissioned by Bavarian Nordic, used “targeted chemotherapy” to treat malignant ascites just as PharmaCyte biotech does. In the study, words like “complete tumor remission” and “cure” were used to describe the results, so why didn’t Bavarian Nordic continue on with its work?
Well, at the time of the study, Bavarian Nordic, the forerunner to Austrianova, had three in-house technologies: (i) the encapsulation technology; (ii) a retroviral vector technology; and (iii) a poxvirus based delivery platform. As a result of the attacks of 9/11 in the United States, Bavarian Nordic decided to focus strategically on the development of a smallpox vaccine based on its poxvirus platform and chose to divest the other two technologies, which eventually were moved into Austrianova.
Austrianova GmbH, based in Europe then, was focused on one big indication -- namely pancreatic cancer. Executives at Austrianova made the decision then to go straight into a pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial in pancreatic cancer, which would have cost the biotech about $40 million. Austrianova was also working on setting up the GMP manufacturing facility in Frankfurt, Germany, and the firm was working on a veterinary clinical trial in mammary cancer.
Prof. Dr. Walter Gunzburg, the Chairman and Chief Technical Officer at Austrianova, said that the company didn’t have the manpower or the resources to work on malignant ascites in addition to all of its other planned activities. “Despite the exciting results in ascites published by Dr. Matthias Löhr, the financial resources available to the company (Austrianova GmbH) in Europe at that time didn't allow us to pursue this indication. We are very glad that PharmaCyte Biotech has now taken up the baton and is again exploring the use of the Cell-in-a-Box® technology to develop a clinical treatment for malignant ascites.”
If this study sounds familiar, it’s because PharmaCyte is currently in preclinical studies with Translational Drug Development (TD2) in Scottsdale, Arizona, to study how effective its treatment can be on the accumulation of malignant ascites. Dr. Löhr, who is now the Chairman of PharmaCyte Biotech’s Scientific Advisory Board, has been involved with the TD2 study from day one.
In the TD2 study, the company is using an ovarian cancer model and working to develop the parameters needed to enter into clinical trials. Based on comments in press releases from PharmaCyte’s CEO, Kenneth L. Waggoner, the company’s treatment appears promising, and plans are being made to enter the clinic to tackle the challenges that malignant ascites presents to patients who have abdominal tumors.
While the studies performed by Dr. Löhr and his team using the colon cancer model were more than 10 years ago, it is quite stunning to hear that they were not only able to “virtually cure malignant ascites” but they also saw “complete tumor remission in all animals” treated with Cell-in-a-Box® (known as Capcell then) and low doses of ifosfamide on days 2-6.
It’s stunning because more than 10 years ago Cell-in-Box® wasn’t nearly as developed as it is today. The technology is much improved in 2015 with capsules that are completely full with active live cells. So, with a more “potent” Cell in a Box® today, patients suffering from malignant ascites from one of the abdominal tumors that causes the accumulation of this fluid, must be elated to see PharmaCyte Biotech reviving the studies to treat this condition where there is currently no treatment available other than the painful and expensive periodic removal of the fluid in a hospital setting.
I think this is where believing in your investment comes into play.
I support the efforts of all those trying to get Cell in a Box(R) to those in need.
I doubt that I would stick around if this was not a biotech focused on improving the quality of life for diabetics and cancer patients.
Also, look at it like this, where many paid an average of .27 for their investment a year ago, today, they can get 3 times the number of shares. In the end, if one can accumulate enough shares, the dilution factor will not be as significant.
And, while continuing to increase a position, that shareholder is also supporting the company by providing additional funds for trials.
It is simply a matter of why one chooses to invest in a company. I am here to see Cell in a Box(R) revolutionize treatments for cancer and diabetes. I also plan on making money when that happens. :)
Thanks, Bio. Have a great weekend!
And here is the same statement from a recent Celgene press release. So what exactly is your point? This is not a unique practice to PharmaCyte...
This press release contains forward-looking statements, which are generally statements that are not historical facts. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the words "expects," "anticipates," "believes," "intends," "estimates," "plans," "will," "outlook" and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are based on management's current plans, estimates, assumptions and projections, and speak only as of the date they are made. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement in light of new information or future events, except as otherwise required by law. Forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond our control. Actual results or outcomes may differ materially from those implied by the forward-looking statements as a result of the impact of a number of factors, many of which are discussed in more detail in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and our other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
http://ir.celgene.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=929201
Absolutely, Pete. Thank you...
Yes Promised Land. We talk about the team of doctors and scientists a lot but it is our own CEO and COO who have had the vision to create International Consortiums, first diabetes and now oncology.
The following article gives great insight into this revolutionary infrastructure to get the best minds in the world working to cure cancers.
Thanks PL and have a great weekend! Always good to hear from you...
http://www.pharmacytebiotech.com/oncology-kols-an-important-piece-of-the-puzzle/
Just out of curiosity, what do you think they know that we don't?
Fros, we do care but as many longs have already said, in the end, the current pps does not matter.
None of us are selling right now. We can wait. There is no urgency here for longs.
As long as the company keeps taking steps forward, no matter how small and no matter how lengthy, we are good.
The thing that we like least about the pps is the fact that it means more dilution because the company has to sell more shares to raise money for trials.
We are not wearing blinders. In fact, imo, our vision is better than most. We can see the possibilities and are willing to take the risks.
This is a biotech and Dr Von Hoff, Dr Hidalgo, Dr Lohr, Dr Gunzburg, Dr Brandtner, Dr Salmons and many other doctors believe in Cell in a Box(R). Science is their expertise.
The fact that big money does not believe is understood. The technicals here are not attractive and this is a start up biotech still in R&D with no revenue.
Now, if the doctors are correct, and this little biotech has a cure for diabetes, and can make inoperable pancreatic cancer, operable, well then...
There will be no doubt and the Street will be able to jump on board at whatever price. I personally would not be able to so I am happy to grow my position at these prices and wait for all the pieces to fall into place...
I disagree, and this interview is from way back in May 2015...
Q: Can you describe some of the major milestones you’ve been able to accomplish since coming on board?
KENNETH: First and foremost, PharmaCyte Biotech has been completely transformed from a nutraceutical company into a pure biotechnology company. We are no longer in the nutraceutical business. Some of the other major milestones include the following:
The financial position of PharmaCyte Biotech has become the strongest in the Company’s history. We are virtually debt-free and have access to all of the necessary capital required to meet both our short-term and long-term financial commitments.
We are well underway in completing the necessary steps to commence three clinical trials using our Cell-in-a-Box® technology. The first will be a Phase 2b clinical trial of our pancreatic cancer treatment. Our pancreatic cancer treatment will be compared “head-to-head” with the current best available treatment for the disease. This treatment is the combination of gemcitabine with Celgene’s drug Abraxane®. We expect to begin this clinical trial in the third quarter of 2015.
We are also underway in completing preparations for two other clinical trials related to the “quality of life” of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and other abdominal tumors. These clinical trials deal with treatments for the: (i) intractable and virtually untreatable pain about 20-25% of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer suffer from; and (ii) accumulation of fluid (knows as ascites) in the abdomen that is extremely uncomfortable for patients with pancreatic cancer and other abdominal tumors. Because ascites fluid can contain cancer cells and these cells can seed and form new tumors, oncologists must frequently remove ascites fluid from patients. This is costly and painful. There is no treatment on the market to slow down the accumulation of ascites fluid. We believe our treatment will. We expect to start both clinical trials late in the third quarter of 2015.
We commenced and concluded our first preclinical study (4 groups of tumor bearing mice) that was conducted by Translational Drug Development (TD2) in the U.S. to determine the ability of our treatment of Cell-in-a-Box® plus ifosfamide to delay the accumulation of malignant ascites fluid. An expanded study (12 groups of mice) is currently being conducted by TD2. This study is designed to further define the parameters that will be needed for our future clinical trial in this area.
Our treatment for advanced, inoperable pancreatic cancer was granted the Orphan Drug designation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2014. Granting of this designation means that PharmaCyte Biotech will receive 7 years of marketing exclusivity in the U.S. for its pancreatic cancer treatment and reduced taxes and assistance from the FDA in the further development of our treatment.
We obtained the worldwide rights to use a genetically modified cell that produces insulin on demand in direct proportion to the amount of glucose (sugar) in their surroundings. These rights were obtained from the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) where Prof. Ann Simpson, along with her colleagues at UTS, have spent years developing this unique cell line called “Melligen.”
We have completed a study at the University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna (UVM) to determine if the Melligen cells have the propensity to form tumors in the body. The Melligen cells were found to be as “safe” as the genetically modified cells used in the previous clinical trials in pancreatic cancer in terms of potential tumor formation in the body over time. We have also begun studies to establish the parameters by which the Melligen cells can produce and store insulin in response to glucose levels in their surroundings.
Through a Collaborative Research Agreement with the Vorarlberg Institute for Vascular Investigation and Treatment in Austria, Dr. Eva-Maria Brandtner has been appointed our Director of Diabetes Program Development. Dr. Brandtner was responsible for studies with the Melligen cells during her previous tenure with our partner, Austrianova, as its Chief Scientist.
An international Diabetes Consortium has been established by PharmaCyte Biotech. The Diabetes Consortium brings together a global coalition of world class experts from various universities and institutions in several countries around the world. All 16 members of the Consortium are committed to developing a treatment for insulin-dependent diabetes using PharmaCyte Biotech’s Cell-in-a-Box® live-cell encapsulation technology combined with human non-pancreatic, insulin-producing cells.
Several contracts and Collaborative Research Agreements have been entered into with leading research universities, scientists, academics and institutions around the globe that will facilitate PharmaCyte Biotech’s development of its cancer and diabetes treatments.
We obtained the exclusive worldwide license from Austrianova to use the Cell-in-a-Box® live cell encapsulation technology in combination with compounds obtained or developed from constituents of Cannabis, known as cannabinoids, for the treatment of diseases and their related symptoms.
Progress is underway at the University of Northern Colorado in an attempt to identify a cell line that can be encapsulated using the Cell-in-a-Box® technology, which, in turn, can be used together with cannabinoid or cannabinoid-like prodrugs as treatment for deadly and difficult to treat cancers, such as brain cancer.
The company changed its name from Nuvilex, Inc. to PharmaCyte Biotech, Inc. to emphasize that it has fully transitioned from a nutraceutical company to a purely biotechnology company.
Significant changes have been made at the Board of Directors level, including a new member with major pharmaceutical experience being named as our first replacement Board member. Others members are in the final interview process, all of whom will be widely experienced in the life sciences.
Thanks, Bio. I am not taking any chances...
We know about the Non Disclosure Agreements. This pps could change in an instant if there is a partnership or buyout announced.
The lower the pps, the more dilution required to fund trials. We know that. I don't like it but "it is what it is." Longs just don't whine about it... We know our investment challenges and potentials. We make a decision, stick with it and live with it.
And some of us buy more at these prices to increase our holdings and help fund trials...
No I don't think its suspicious. I don't even know if they knew about Cell in a Box. I do know that once Dr Von Hoff read the data from the previous trials, he decided he wanted to work with it to help his patients. That is present day... The past is really of no import.
That may be true but Imaging Endpoints is a CRO. They are not just a "radiology imaging place." CRO, Contract Research Organization.
Here is good article about how radiological imaging is becoming more significant in getting FDA approvals.
http://www.bioclinica.com/assets/Uploads/image-conscious.pdf
Dr Von Hoff has a major track record in working with the FDA. In fact, he was on their Advisory board during Bush's administration.
He is designing our trials, all of them, as of yesterday's news. I imagine he is doing it for an "unmet" need since Dr Hidalgo and Dr Lohr's most recent research article discusses unmet needs in regards to pancreatic cancer treatments. In my opinion, he knows what he is doing and how to get the FDAs attention.
http://www.azbio.org/von-hoff-lederberg
http://ir.pharmacytebiotech.com/press-releases/detail/49/pharmacyte-biotechs-scientific-advisory-board-members
Did you get a chance to read the article yourself? The first statement is written by the author of the article. The second is a direct quote from Ken Waggoner.
This is similar to the Dr Von Hoff involvement. Many chose not to believe KW when he said Dr Von Hoff approached him. However, TD2s CEO confirmed KWs statement in a face to face video interview.
And why do you think that? Steve Gately has not come forward claiming that he was misrepresented.
Surely he knows about the video since TD2 is working with PharmaCyte.
The CEO of TD2, Steve Gately, when asked how PharmaCyte came to work with them said, Dr Von Hoff saw the data and reached out to Ken Waggoner.
Ken told the same story a year earlier in an interview and many doubted that he was telling the truth. Well he was telling the truth.
Go to 17:00 in the corporate video, you will see Steve Gately, TD2s CEO, tell himself how TD2 got involved.
http://www.pharmacytebiotech.com/media/
Ahh, but we do have a clue. This has been shared many times before but I am happy to share it again...
"But with the prospect of large trials looming down the road, the company also is assessing the interest of big pharmas, and many have signed nondisclosure agreements.
'We’ve been approached by a number of people who want to get involved,” Waggoner said. “They’ve recognized that our treatment is very different from any approach that’s out there.'”
And here is what Investopedia has to say about NDAs..
"NDAs arise when two companies are about to do business together. The parties are often restricted from releasing information regarding any business processes of the counter-party that are integral to the company's operations. NDAs also may arise between an employer and employee. If the employee will have access to sensitive information about the company they may be asked to sign a NDA when they are hired. This will provide an incentive to the employee not to release this sensitive information and avoid a costly legal headache."
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nda.asp#ixzz3lK3RUbsE
http://www.pharmacytebiotech.com/pharmacyte-seeks-to-solve-pancreas-puzzle-with-cell-in-a-box/
OK, using that logic, why would Dr Von Hoff contact PharmaCyte to get involved with Cell in a Box. He came to us, remember? His peer at TD2 shares that bit of info with us in the video...
Seriously, why would he contact us asking to do preclinical trials if he did not believe that Cell in a Box was a potential treatment in pancreatic cancer?
I have a different perspective on that. He is obviously a believer and long term shareholder. He is just using those shares as a place holder to keep an eye on our progress.
I think it is quite a compliment...
I am ok with the NDAs coming first. Time will tell if any of them bite but they are paying attention...