InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 16
Posts 307
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/15/2014

Re: DoGood_DoWell post# 19550

Thursday, 09/25/2014 10:26:47 PM

Thursday, September 25, 2014 10:26:47 PM

Post# of 697062
Do Good Do Well & Sir Flip, I understand that the amount of tumor required to create DCVax-L is quite small. If it is available at future points in time would this be better than utilizing Direct?

I am fascinated with the possibility of expanding out the treatment over time and its implications.

I posted on YMB:
What I am proposing here is the second and potentially "Nth" leukapheresis, when combined with then current tumor lysate, would deliver a more relevent dosing as OS expands outward. Cancer does not stay stable. It changes, adapts and morphs itself to avoid a patient's immune system over time. This is why, ultimately, even patients receiving DCVax-L multiple doses from the same original batch, succumb to their disease. I am suggesting that the cancer at future points in time adapts even to the initial DCVax-L enhanced immune system. By creating a new batch of then current tumor lysate in combination with then current white blood cells, the potential exists to reset the OS clock and QOL experienced. At each iteration the cancer would have a smaller range of adaptability in which to avoid the body's immune system. At each batch point the body's immune system would carry forward the memory of the earlier iterations, ultimately "trapping" the cancer into an extinguishable corner.

If what I am suggesting here has viability, the potential revenue stream doubles, triples or more.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NWBO News