InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 276
Posts 32594
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/14/2013

Re: learningcurve2020 post# 436440

Wednesday, 01/19/2022 8:44:46 AM

Wednesday, January 19, 2022 8:44:46 AM

Post# of 695405
For about two decades, BP didn’t get it.

1. They first thought Autologous DC therapy was too dangerous, because they feared the immune system would attack the patient.

They were unequivocally proven wrong.

2. BP thought autologous DC therapy was too cumbersome to commercialize through automation.

Flaskworks is about to prove they were wrong.

3. BP thought autologous DCs were too weak to invoke a healthy immune response.

They are now internally quite aware that it does.

4. BP thought autologous DCs were too weak to improve survival in GBM (and other indications)

They are about to be proven wrong, IMO.

BP likes pills and infusions. Unfortunately, BP tried all those against GBM, and with the exception of the small incremental improvement in methylated GBM via Temodar chemotherapy pills, BP failed.

Now, BP must consider going back to look at autologous DC recent advancements in mass production, efficacy and safety.

BP is shocked to see an autologous DC therapy has run the gauntlet, and BP’s only remaining question is the strength of efficacy results. If the results are decent, the non-autologous BP ship will sail away with the flat-earthers.

I do agree that it’s madness this technology wasn’t brought along more expediently. However, arguably, BP wasn’t going to let it see the light of day until they had tried all their go to technologies. One by one, they failed.

Now, there is a commercially feasible autologous therapy nearly wrapped up with a bow on top. The only question remaining is the level of efficacy. We are about to find out.



Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NWBO News