In respect of the Phase 3 DCVax-L trial, I suggest that everybody (and I don't mean just those on this board) should look at the totality of knowledge about how many people have ever been cured of GBM (not just the percentage figures of comparison groups in other trials) with and without the current Standard of Care (SOC). The answer is ZERO (or as near as zero as you can get). Then they should look at how DCVax-L has altered the Overall Survival (OS) in both new GBM and in recurrent GBM. The result jumps off the page and hits you square between the eyes that DCVax-L has a significant positive effect on both being cured and, if not cured, surviving longer.
Add into this, the early survival results from Prof. Liau's current ongoing study of survival with DCvax-L + checkpoint inhibitors in GBM. This shows that after 2 years the median overall survival point hasn't been reached (ie more than 50% patients are still alive 2 years after they started the combined treatment). The benefit of DCVax-L treatment is undeniably, slam, bang, dunk obvious for all to see.
Of course, there are people biased against DCVax for whatever reason - financial (probably Big Pharma together with its paid minions of FUDsters), personal pride (eg Stupp, van den Bent and Preusser) and those whose god is filthy lucre and care nought for the sufferers who have died and will die because DCVax is not yet licenced. They are going to delay the inevitable for as long as they can by arguing the toss over the minutiae of the Phase 3 trial; was the comparison group truly representative?, was the recruitment really unbiased or was it skewed to produce a better result?. The list could be endless.
They have to argue the toss about whether the Phase 3 trial did actually show that DCVax works in the hope of delaying the licencing of DCVax until such time as NWBO is bakrupted and the residua of the Company can be bought at rock bottom prices by those very same people who bankrupted the company.
Just listen to the trivial arguments that they are dredging up to make a case against the validity of the trial. It is reminiscent of the now unbelievable arguments among some Bishops of the early Christian church as to how many angels could stand on the head of a pin!! It is arguing over inconsequential points - in the current instance, to muddy the waters for as long as possible.
You can see this, I can see this, and I have no doubt whatsoever that the membership of the MHRA and NICE (and even the FDA) can see this. I have no doubt that they can recognise spoiling tactics when they see them. I also have no doubt whatsoever that the MHRA will licence DCVax, based on the totality of current knowledge. That will be big news and the efficacy of DCVax in the teatment of GBM will soon become common knowledge among the medical population of the UK. Eventually it will make the general Press in the UK (especially if NWBO step up to the plate and push its product into the limelight) because the UK is smaller and more compact than the USA with fewer inimical organisations based here to mount a campaign against it). Once licenced over here, the FDA will not dare delay much longer because of the pressure that US popular opinion will place on them.
I wish all (even FUDsters) the compliments of the Season / Happy Christmas / Happy Hannukah / Chag Urim Sameach (plus greetings in any other religious language about which I have no knowledge).
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
