You have stretched too much but your efforts are appreciated. Agreed the stubbornly fixed number of 300 and the final data collection day of September 2015 appeared in the clinical trial site might mean something although the site is famous for its unreliability: while all other trivial has been updated regularly , why not the total enrolment number and the final data collection day if there were some changes?
As far as the most positive scenario is concerned, DMC by seeing the unexpectedly good data (unblinded)can decided to have a look (interim analysis) before full enrolment. No rules have prohibited that. And if the results confirm, it can recommend stop and the company can file AA application to FDA if the results are significant good enough (for instance, more than 6 months or more PFS advantage over standard of care compared to the target 4 months). Of course, before the filing, there must first have some consultation with FDA for direction.
If FDA not buy it, the company may just issue a release saying the temporary screen halt has been lifted as the 1st interim analysis has been conducted, and the trial will continue according to the protocol.
For others and worthy reminder: It should be clear from CEO Linda Powers remarks Aug 2014 about why the DC VAX L Ph3 was redesigned and expanded and to be HIGHER powered to SUCCEED:
Excerpted from NWBO PR Aug 2014:
Moreove all of this was under the auspices of Max Bosch and herein is part of his responsibilities from NWBO website
Also as it relates to current clinical site issues:
For others, good to know that CEO relies upon:
AND when money gets TIGHT what happened in 2013 as copied and pasted from the last proxy statement filed last Nov 2014 is most likely what may be in effect: