guess Gold could have fielded Monane's Treg question better and show his depth of knowledge in the field.
Mitch knows very well the developments in the field in this regard and follows them as closely as you'd expect any biotech CEO to follow them. With the Provenge data in hand (that Petrylak presented), he's simply one of the camp that believes chemo following is the right approach.
We have a good-natured disagreement over this that we discuss a few times a year when we run into each other at conferences or have some otherwise unscheduled time to chat.
I'm pretty sure the science will prove me right that pre-treatment is the right way to get an immediate efficacy boost for an active immunotherapy.
For active immunos like Provenge that provide a lasting immune response, chemo after may also be effective not because of effects on the T-cell system but because they might pop open cells that release the target antigen and spur a "revitalization" of the immune system response.
It may turn out that both Mitch and I are right. That's an interesting thought because it would put active immuno as the default center piece of cancer treatment.
Unless otherwise indicated, this is the personal viewpoint of David Miller and not necessarily that of Biotech Stock Research, LLC