InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 31
Posts 2649
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/28/2013

Re: None

Monday, 02/22/2016 10:16:38 AM

Monday, February 22, 2016 10:16:38 AM

Post# of 705558
If DCVax-L is shooting for all the marbles, then it is possible that they will have to show greater efficacy than Celldex, within Celldex's subgroup, to win. They may not have to be powered for that, but mean efficacy for that subgroup may have to be greater than that of Celldex.

What are the chances of that? AF would have you believe that the greater concentration on that subgroup, in terms of antigen focus, would favor Celldex. He would have you believe that such is common sense. Maybe it is for someone somewhere, but he expected his simple analogy concerning shotguns and elephant-guns and elephants to be some kind of proof.

The fact is, from slightly above lay-mans level it looks like this: There are probably immune bloom path's that can be bottle-necks. There are a finite number of T-Cells hanging around waiting for DC's to present their antigens. Rather, while there are an enormous number of such T-Cells waiting in the lymph nodes, there are a very finite number of each kind. Thus each antigen type may not need to be presented in large numbers to saturate that particular antigen->T-Cell path. If that is the case than presenting smaller numbers of many different kinds of antigens wins... by a very large margin.

So that is possibly the current pending question being answered. Which may be what many have said a hundred times in recent posts. If so... sorry. But I know Turtle and others are hanging on my every word. So while many of you may be hoping that if you just don't reply, I will go away, I feel I have a duty to ramble on.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NWBO News