NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[flipper44]

Sentimentstocks did some good DD on the vanguard group. Blood sweat and tears trying to read all those lines and steps on the old blended km curve.

38 in that vanguard (2008/2009) group if I recall.
38 total unidentified mgmt as well in the entire trial population of 331.

Coincidence? Not certain.

24 unidentified mgmt amongst 35 noncrossovers
14 unidentified mgmt amongst 296 treated.

Your theory: High number of unidentified that didn’t make it long enough to crossover (assumption from DD, vanguard group didn’t due well) (German Colnel thinks noncrossovers did well) unresolved.

One way to organize the vanguard would have been to censor, another would simply be to exclude them in the new endpoints. Perhaps both were done.

Still, 14 unidentified mgmt in current endpoint groupings.
3 in rGBM out of 64 (4.7%)
11 in nGBM out of 296 (4.7%)

That’s not enough to really disrupt the trends upwards or downwards.

Hmmm. The noncrossovers would definitely be impacted at 63% unidentified mgmt. These are the ones that you mostly assume couldn’t survive long enough in the early days to make it to crossover treatment.

As You probably read earlier, I did think unidentified mgmt were likely to have been mostly from the earliest cohort, so I agree with you there.

My memory is cloudy, however regarding how long they made patients wait in the vanguard cohort to cross over. Hmm.

Logic dictates
1. you’d want to crossover,
2. Most (24 out of 38) mgmt unidentified did not crossover
3. Most mgmt unidentified likely came from earliest cohort.
4. Senti’s and our DD from years ago thought vanguard group survival not as strong.

The logic starts to get self reinforcing, which is not a bad thing, but each leg is part of the chair.

Anybody else think the early vanguard group is the one that primarily makes up the 24 unidentified mgmt in the noncrossover group?

Again, some of us (who looked closely at the old blended charts long ago) think the vanguard (early enrolled) group didn’t do quite as well. Today, in hindsight, maybe that was due to delayed crossover that caused the actual noncrossover. Certainly there must be a legitimate reason all 63% unidentified mgmt ended up in noncrossover while only 4.7% ended up in the recurrent and newly diagnosed populations.

Note: German Colnel’s position is somewhat opposite about how the 24 unidentified fared in the noncrossovers. He thinks they did well, because he think they were almost all or all methylated had they been tested.

The reason we can’t truly try to decipher how the noncrossovers fared is because the crossover group survival is from time of relapse.

So, we have some people thinking the noncrossovers did well and others of us thinking they probably did not do so well.

This may seem unimportant, but it may mean, as one piece of evidence, over time, how important DCVax-l treatment was and is. The vanguard theory above, also ultimately fits discontinuing the placebo enrollment back in fall 2015.

(Reminder: Back in 2008 to 2009, it was much harder to decipher mgmt status)