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.
It was my understanding that "they" are using quantum cryptography to communicate those keys...impossible to crack:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_key_distribution
I agree with you, for the most part...but, typically if results are as good as many post here, insiders would already know and the price would rise. In this to my gills at a higher average pps than most here. I'll be sad if I was wrong technically, as I truly am a scientist/researcher, but I will be even more sad if I was correct technically, and other forces prevented the DCVax platform from entering the commercial market.
Here is the real problem with something like DCVax getting approved for the masses:
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
http://www.worldometers.info/
This issue could easily be solved with advances in science and engineering to accommodate this kind of exponential expansion into a currently finite space, but it would take a substantial investment into education, manpower, and infrastructure to achieve...I do not see that happening under the current administration...
Would a R/S followed by an uplisting trigger share accountability wrt shorts and naked shorts?
I think they are reporting it this way because the top 100 captures the 30ish percent long tail within the trial.
I voted for current management...not that my drop-in-the-bucket matters much...
I think I'm in deeper than most here...CHEERS!
https://radiopaedia.org/articles/stupp-protocol-for-glioblastoma?lang=us
Anybody up to date on this trial?
http://fdaaa.trialstracker.net/trial/NCT03014804/
Says it started on 1 January 2019.
Could this represent the confirmatory trial for the Phase III?
There are reporting protocols for all SAEs (Serious Adverse Events), experimental treatment related or otherwise and that reporting is pretty much automatic. Hence the yearly sweep of events to save money, vs. a very expensive constant monitoring makes sense. Now, you might say that it doesn't cost that much for constant monitoring, but recall that the data is never reported directly to the company, it has to go through the data monitoring committee and the CRO before it gets to the company. I'm sure a contract that insists on constant monitoring is much more expensive than a contract that does a sweep and reports it to the company once annually.
So, to use your vernacular: Holy Shit YES! I think I do know better than you do!
So you disagree with this:
Semblance: the outward appearance or apparent form of something, especially when the reality is different.
Yes, still here, still long, just lurking and awaiting results.
I think you mean misled...mislead is present tense...
As a researcher, to allow your name to be added as a contributing author to a peer-reviewed publication means that you are staking your reputation on the validity of the data within the publication...65 authors = a statement, not just a declaration of who contributed.
It also may have OS and PFS broken out according to immunological markers/cancer phenotype...that data should not be blinded, but it would very likely tell an interesting story.
Hopefully they will allow audio recording devices.
Please take good notes and post the transcript, for those of us unable to make it.
In the presentation given by Dr. Bosch on 31 August, 2017, on slide 12, it clearly states that OS "events" accrue at about 2/month and that OS threshold is expected to be reached in July of 2018...
so, we are waiting on approximately 24 patients to succumb to the inevitable conclusion that awaits us all...
Everyone keeps asking about how many were LTFU, but Dr. Bosch essentially answered your question right there...
231 OS events as of 31 August 2017, 233 OS events required before analysis
233 - 231 =2
24 - 2= approximately 22 LTFU for OS...and as some here have said, LTFU can change if the patient is "found"
Now, there is clearly a lot going on wrt PFS in the interim. I would guess that a lot of time, money, and effort is being expended to double-check each progression event to make sure that it isn't pspd.
It's tough to say that a patient actually had true progressive disease if they are still alive several years after having "progressed" and if the patient now has clean scans.
Does anybody have an idea of the outstanding warrant count now that the NWBOW and other warrants have expired?
I offloaded my warrants in a similar manner. I believe that some entity is sucking up the warrants in order to use them to short against. It doesn't matter that they are out of the money. I think most remaining longs aren't going to sell at this point, so warrants are the only tool that can be used to short without full on naked shorting.
A good friend of mine just passed less than a month after having a brain tumor removed, from complications. Folks, this cancer is nasty. I know many have said that the new SOC OS median is around 18 months, but based on a number of recent cases that I've tracked and know, I don't think that is correct. R.I.P. Rio
I have not been on since yesterday morning and am catching up. Thank you.
Occam's razor indicates that I am wrong, but in for a dime, in for a dollar--I bought more. Still, I think my per share cost basis is higher than most that remain. I've done my DD, but despite the soundness of the science, there are still considerable headwinds. Crossing my fingers for a Black Swan.
Ditto, I am right there with you...
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02718391
This trial provides new information...
*HINT*
Review the history of changes to the trial...
Additional HINT:
Experimental: Arm A: Autologous Dendritic Cell vaccine
Daily 3 MU Interleukin 2 will be administered subcutaneously for 5 days starting from the second day after each vaccine dose. Vaccine doses will be given intradermally in two sites close to inguinal or axillary lymphnode stations that had not site of previous surgical exeresis.The first dose (WK1) will consist of freshly prepared vaccine, whereas for all the further doses cryopreserved aliquots will be utilized. The remaining 5 doses will be administered every 4 weeks to complete six months of therapy (six vaccines).
What is DCVax-L for again? All operable solid tumors you say?
I agree. To your point, the slide title on slide 8 is not an error.
Further, and to reiterate, I think that they changed the X-over criteria so that patients know what arm they were in when they progress. This is the only ethical thing to do if the CRO has noticed that a particular subgroup often shows pspd.
What would the FDA do if almost ALL mesenchymal subgroup patients were in the long tail? (X-over + DCVax-L)...+ a few others, of course
I tried that already. I have a hunch that NWBO has purposefully not updated the title on slide 8:
DCVax-L Phase II Trial Design -- Crossover
I think that the Crossover criteria changed the last time they modified the trial and they are trying to keep a lid on it while still staying between-the-lines wrt disclosure to the public.
So, I sent an email after the June 5 presentation asking if the title of the slide was an error and never heard back. Based on your logic they should have corrected this "error," in the August presentation, yet they have not.
Taking it a step further, I think that the underlined word not in that slide is meaningful.
Perhaps the patient is unblinded upon progression. This is really the only change that they could make, since any other changes would violate the consent form and what the patients originally signed up for. This also makes sense if the trial was seeing a lot of pseudoprogression. It would be unethical to keep the patient blinded if clinicians have realized that X-over patients of a certain subtype often show progression, but it usually pspd.
Flipper you are correct, the slide was updated and they purposefully did not change the expected time of the last two events. I can only conclude from this that those two events did occur and now they are reviewing the data. Recall that they've also said that they would lock the data and analyze it prior to a PR. Hopefully that means the CRO is working behind the scenes to compile all of the data and we will get unblinded data on final end points soon. In two weeks would be nice, but with NWBO, who knows.
Slide #8 of todays' presentation still reads: DCVax-L Phase II Trial Design -- Crossover
Considering that I already wrote the company and asked whether the Phase-II Crossover design is any different than the Phase-III from the last presentation, and they didn't get back to me...and they still didn't correct the slid...either there is something different and they don't want to address it, or they just aren't keeping up with their email. Both possibilities carry different meaning...
I received four... :/
Two IRAs, and two personal accounts...
Yes, this waiting is painful...
Tell that to Casey...I understand that there are a lot of variables at play here, but the misses on projected dates and the magnitude of those misses is getting a bit ridiculous. Currently I am down A LOT of $$ for me. I get that research brings unknowns, truly I do, but at the end of the day, you still have to explain those delays and setbacks to your funding agencies, which includes retail investors.