The new paper on DCVax Direct is hopefully the beginning of anther additional chapter with the DCVax platform, one that has a more direct path, pun intended. The paper reveals a lot of information though I think many were looking for more commercially valuable information such as an update on survival. I think the paper is focused on the science, appropriate at P1. The mfg technology will have to be kept as close to the vest as possible at this stage for good reasons and I would not expect much to come out on that for quite some time.
Still focused on L though, concerning DC science, there is more information coming out in a more rapid fashion from around the globe because the immune system via DC's is so important to curing cancer and all roads will probably wind up back with DC's since they are so vital to the immune system functioning. It is fascinating that there is so much work going on but yet such a lack of publicly available data on the key elements of the science. The puzzle of mesenchymal high mutation rate being mostly unmethylated and proneural lack of mutation rate being more methylated is quite interesting.
The basic info appears to be that DCVax-L is the immune system activator but it needs time to get set up and to operate. The stronger the immune system and the weaker the tumor defenses are the more effective DCVax-L is, this is obvious. And, the strengthening of the immune system is where L comes in, though there are many, many details involved in maximizing the immune system strengthening effectiveness from mfg to DC quality to injection site to injection regimen and dose to... Then, what appears to be even more complex comes into play, that of weakening the tumor defenses against DCVax-L action. Here is where the heterogeneity, both intra and inter, of the GBM tumors gets complex. On top of that there appears to be a real lack of accepted understanding of the relationships of the various categories of tumor types to each other and their respective responses to therapy. On top of that I think there is a difficulty in attaining clean data on observations due to brain tumor tissue sampling and testing capabilities, particularly when tumors are so heterogenous. So, where does one start. The approach you would think would have to be with either a generic cancer tissue elimination drug, which none exists in general let alone one that can effectively be employed in the brain. Or, strengthening the immune system to defeat the tumor while figuring out how to perform the strengthening in such a treatment unfriendly environment as GBM tumors.
DCVax-L needs time to get set up and to proliferate and operate the immune system. Mesenchymal tumor mutation provides the best doorway to get into the battle zone since the tumor has less time to build its defenses due to the rate of mutation of surface connectors for DCVax-L to exploit. Yet, methylated tumors appear to allow aberrant brain tissue to be eliminated. And, the possibility of low dose CI's still sound like they may be of assistance by taking off the fake brakes put on the immune system by these tumor defenses. So, the challenge seems to be how to optimize DCVax-L, to make it, deliver it, and, allow it to be effective by giving it the opportunity to get set up and operate the immune system. The amount of detail in each section of the challenge let alone all sections together is daunting. Yet it is appearing more and more that a beachhead of a beginning point of answers has been generated by NWBO. And, it certainly appears to be true that in the hunt for the cure for cancer all roads will continue to lead to DC therapy because it is so logical and natural.
Continued good luck to all real investors here.
