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.
Thanks, I sent a copy to LG and DI, expressing hopes we also do so in the not too distant future. (We need to take care of business first).
some believe these tiny premarket shares are a way to send messages with a pre arranged code. If so, this is easy to mess up cheaply, just buy or sell one or two shares premarket and mess up the message sent.
I too believe they will announce an ASM before year end.
Of course there are differences, a major one is cost. I was making a point about the basic principle. Like I said, aspirin is a a very imperfect comparison. I was just using it to illustrate the basic point I was making.
I have no quarrel with what you wrote. But just imagine if there was no aspirin and it just got invented today, This is a treatment that reduces high fever (among other things). If they now ran trials to put aspirin on the market as a treatment for high fever, would they have to run a separate trial for each indication wherein fever occurs - a very large number of possible causes of fever? Or simply run one large trial looking at fever as a single problem they wish to treat and disregards the differences that may exist for the purposes of this trial. I understand this a very imperfect analogy, but I think it crudely makes the point I wish to make - and not differentiate between a fever in a flu patient versus a fever in say a covid patient or any of the other multitude of causes of fever.
I understand where you are coming from. Sure there will be differences based on the organ in which the cancer finds itself and presumably there may be differences in what is required to treat them. But I suggest it is worth a shot that the similarities IN MOST solid cancers will allow them to be treated by the same PLATFORM without problem even if several may not (or may need some further modification to the same basic protocol). Say some 16 cancer types respond well to this treatment. Why delay approval for use in these 16 cancer types for many, many years?
In separate trial it may take many, many year, at huge cost, and those waiting with type X cancer, may have to wait for 10 to 20 years before we even get to trial for variety X cancer.. There would clearly need to be some sort of follow up procedures to determine which if any cancer types are not responding to this treatment and drop them from the label. But I believe that the greater good is for much more rapid approval and treatment for those cancers that respond well to the treatment (hopefully most solid cancer types)..
I am no expert, but in my lay opinion, only one trial should be needed to gain approval for all solid tumors of any type.
Can we not ignore the differences between the cancer's location and focus on the similarities and design the trial such that say a minimum number of persons will be treated for each named cancer and above that minimum they could enroll any cancer type as may wish treatment to fill the trial. This could simply be thought of as a trial for treatment of "solid cancer," without any further adjectives or sub-categories.
So for example perhaps the trial could name say 20 (not rare) solid cancers, and perhaps have trial size of say 1000. Then they would have to enroll at least say 25 of each of these types of cancer in the trial. That would be 500 patients, and the remaining 500 could be of ANY solid cancer without respect to cancer type.
I would suggest that a good response to this sort of trial should merit a global approval for all solid cancers (even beyond the 20 named cancers) without taking years of trials, and huge expense, for many lengthy trials in every solid cancer type.
I am sure many will say this is not the way of the FDA. And I say why the heck not. If in fact certain cancers will not succumb to the DCVAX treatment that will be seen by following the treatment for the first several years to see if there is no effect on certain cancers. In any case even then at least the DCVAX is safe and does not cause any harm.
But if you are living o a park bench you probably can not afford the longer bolts.
After all, how can you attach a flat park bench to a round Earth?
AEK, I think thet this is not quite right.
Comment 4: Looks like the MOS for rGBM combo patients will be 27 months.
this is really great info, but why the secrecy on the slides????
I don't think so. IMO it is still in the works.
Thanks ATL, this is really cool!! I am wondering if the spike in SP that happened at about 1:15 PM (a little more than an hour after your post) was due to your info.
you left one out from Lykiri:
Long tail (5 years)
LL
"5 years... not just survival but 5 years without recurrence"
what time is LL speaking today and tomorrow? It was to be after hours?
Anyone know why iHub has lost the Message Number column on the far left and now replaced with the Likes column in its place? It is very disorienting.
While I am convinced we are headed to some good news in the near future, and in the end while all good news is "good" some are better than others. Not all the same wrt investors or shorts. But the difference can be day and night for shorts, much more so than for the longs.
From the short perspective, imagine two alternatives for the good news to take. One, they announce very good news in the PIII trial and a good JA and news for a BLA and news for more combo trials and for Direct trials. Two, the announce a buy out say to MRK at X dollars plus Y MRK shares per share of NWBO.
While both are very good for longs, the second path is the kiss of death for all shorts, as there is no way for the shorts to talk down or spin the buyout. They are immediate losers as soon as the news is made known. On the first path for the good news, there is always the possibility to spin the news with lies, and hit pieces and predictions of ultimate failure for a myriad number of reasons they can suggest - even if they are far from the truth. The shorts can live to fight another day. Even if the path one good news causes them some loss = they will fight on. Witness May10 etc.
You need to read more closely. I clearly wrote that IMO it would be the announcement of the ASM before Nov. 20.
IMO, you are totally wrong. They will have an ASM this year. Hopefully one punch of several more before year end and likely before Nov 20 (at least for the announcement so far as ASM is concerned).
This hype is pure fantasy. We will see this fake hype train and then on the other side a lot of fake disappointment at how the share price didn't rise as expected. This whole narrative is fabricated. It isn't based in reality.
Right on.
Gary, I think you are underestimating!
I don't think so. It's all systems go. Shorts better cover.
My guts tells me that November will be nothing burger again. Hoping but not expecting anything but disappointment.
Assuming everything else you said is true, LP isn’t doing crap about that and isn’t coming for anyone.
You honestly think the CEO of the biotech that cracked cancer and has the SOC for all solid tumors is gonna waste their time prosecuting a two bit nobody AF and the second rate media platforms he represents?
If LP is focused on the peasants that are “attacking this stock” at all, that is a huge problem, as it means she doesn’t have anything better to do with her time.
a two bit nobody AF and the second rate media platforms he represents
I meant more than "It couldn’t hurt." I have every hope that this will be the turning point that starts DCVAX on it way to its future and will begin to be recognized by the market in a significant rise in share price that the MMs will not be able to prevent.. This will be the proverbial tiny move from the one yard line into goal - the beginning of the next era of DCVAX..
I am hearing that we should be watching the Liau presentation at SNO which will be about the PIII and to hopefully expect other news in the lead up to that period or there abouts. I am hopeful this will be significant.
lack of communication is definitely a major piece of the story (lack of story) but AF remains a bit player.
Well, right now the market believes him more than Linda because his article drove the stock from $2.10 to ~$.38 AFTER the non-TLD data was announced. It’s yet to recover and not a peep from NWBO!
Actually, what the long wait and anticipation for the JA has produced a very high expectation for the content of the JA. I surely hope that the article will have some real punch to it well beyond that already released on May 10 and will be able to match the greater expectations. Even with a "just" good JA, the shorts are sure to play on this theme when it arrives.
You are way way out. Max 2years per other solid cancers hopefully running concurrently, They will start right into PIII and these will not take as long now that they have a beaten track and experience in running the trial and its design. They may even have additional results from off label use in that period to help guide them further. Hopefully they will be all done between 2024 and 2026 at latest.
Personally, I don't invest in companies I believe to be run by criminals but to each their own. Usually, this is the narrative I would push as a short. Something doesn't add up!
By all appearances it’s a done deal ex. Manufacturing for approval is all that’s left
Does 2-3 months make a difference as long as the drug is approved?
PM, actually that makes sense. Shorts are better off without an ASM, so why go out of their way and push for it?
I hope that will be the case
but they likely are not putting out a proxy until some type of shareholder happiness hits, IMO.
ve'gam le'mar.
All dates point to 11/(10-11) /2022 for multiple releases, imo