Biotech Values

[iwfal]

CLDX -

In my view it may be hard to tell anything much in either case. If I recall correctly (it's been a while) both CLDX and IMUC have quite a long period post-surgery where they do the analysis and prepare their vaccine. It was unclear to me how they counted patients that died in that period (or deteriorated enough so that they were never treated). In a randomized trial those patients would of course be part of the drug group, but in a comparison with historical controls they might not have been so fastidious.

CLDX actually seems to be pretty reliable in how they analyze and report data. I have not yet found any of the small bio sloppiness or fooling-themselves - e.g. in their rindo comparison to historical controls the historical graphs actually show no progression during chemorad so they did not actually do as you speculated above. Of course it is a comparison to historicals, with all the concerns that brings - but their rigor lends credence to their reported data that upon recurrence the rates of EGFRviii are much lower (indicating the vaccine is doing what it is supposed to do).

FWIW.