InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 46
Posts 5645
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/05/2015

Re: hyperopia post# 390124

Monday, 07/19/2021 6:18:23 PM

Monday, July 19, 2021 6:18:23 PM

Post# of 693567
Hi hyperopia.
Thanks for the reminder on the adjuvant trial.
I have to say that that one stopped recruiting about six years ago.
And I think we had any results that we are likely to get some considerable time back. It's those 23 patients again...
The question about how important is the addition of Poly-ICLC or Imiquimod adjuvants is not really answered for me, though they may augment a treatment response.
Anyway the P3 did without.
But they could conceivably be used anyway off-label on an individual level, as both already have an approval.

I'm not so sure that they do have a pretty good idea as to who responds best to L, other than the already very apparent meth/unmeth difference. How could they? Or they might have some idea, but simply not have had the opportunity to test. For example; L without TMZ for unmeth might work better and would prevent the TMZ-induced mutational shift.
My hypothesis which is really based on nothing tangible, is that some of the UCLA guys are caught up in the 'combo is best' mantra.
Apart from anything else, such a combo would be putting the price tag up to close on $0.5M...
And surely we are not sufficiently taking into account the consistent failure to date of ICI's in brain cancer, and the HPD, auto-immune dysfunction and adaptive resistance associated with ICIs in other cancers!
My supposition is that Rob Prins is the primary enthusiast for the combo with an ICI.
Before anyone shoots me down, this is just a personal current hypothesis.
If future info or data sheds more light, and proves me wide of the mark, I'll amend my hypothesis accordingly!
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NWBO News