I take a slightly different view.
Without looking back up research done by AVII and others, I recall conditional survival phenomenon existed in long term survivors of GBM that received SOC in past years.
Bears like AVII and Ex have been saying “so what” if DCVax long term survivors have a better chance of surviving each consecutive year, that happens with SOC as well.
So, the solution is to see if the DCVax trial also beats external controls regarding this parameter. Hence the additional analysis.
My guess is that is perhaps one reason why, as I said a day or two ago, this trial ran on so long — because comparing conditional survival, by definition, requires a very mature set of data to reach statistical conclusions on longevity odds once impressive longevity already occurred in some patients.
This next point is also important. In the real world, those SOC long term survivors tend to be IDH mutant, which is a small subgroup WHO no longer considers a subset of GBM since 2021. However, our trial probably has/had very few patients with IDH mutant tumors, unlike prior GBM studies testing other treatments. Our trial, as Dr. Liau seems to infer from compassionate care and expanded use arms, probably is seeing long term conditional survival odds improve for IDH wild type, which is still considered GBM and is very rarely identified by long term survival when treated only by SOC.
Many people, hedge funds and others, in my opinion, don’t understand that it’s looking like NWBO is creating a true class of long term GBM survivors, whereas in the past, most long term survivors getting SOC therapy were, by today’s standards, not suffering from GBM.
