I know I said I would not be posting here, but now I have to even the balance on negativity here. What you are saying is filtered by negativism only.
NICE chose to update the page and reaffirm the process. If they were just going to suspend or abandon the project, they could’ve marked it as “on hold,” “withdrawn,” or even removed it. They didn’t. That means NICE still sees value in the process continuing even if just in a holding pattern. This isn’t a reimbursement project out of nowhere. NICE wouldn’t initiate or maintain an STA for a product they believe will likely be denied authorization. There’s a significant planning and scoping process behind it especially for something as niche and complex as DCVax-L. Regulators move carefully but purposefully. A company "still being engaged with MHRA" a full year after submission means MHRA hasn’t rejected it and they’re still communicating. There may be ongoing steps like final administrative clearances, labeling, or legal discussions. Even if NICE reached out first, the company responded quickly and affirmatively, and the project stayed " in progress.” That alone is a green light.
Your skeptical interpretation is a narrow procedural reading that underplays the implications of the status being maintained and publicly reaffirmed. The bigger picture suggests momentum is intact, even if slow.
Market Data 
Markets 
