I wonder how people are viewing / modeling GBM recurrence after DCVax-L treatment? When you (-all) talk about a subsequent mutation allowing the cancer to recurr, what are you visualizing?
Are you thinking that a previous antigen target is now gone due to the mutation, and the loss of that target has moved the immune system balance in favor of the cancer, or that a resulting cancer functional change has occurred due to the mutation that puts the balance in favor of the tumor / cancer. Ie the addition of cloaking. Ie via hyaluronic slime... just examples.
The model that DCVax-L is attacking many antigens leans in favor of the second view, in my opinion.
While attacking many antigens may prove to be better than attacking a single antigen in greater force as AF claims, nobody is claiming that a cancer vaccine has to attack all antigens. Therefore it should be a little surprising that a mutation could be responsible for a cancer recurring, unless that mutation is substantially advantageous to the cancer, and thus upsets the balance.
Look forward to your views, (except from the two posters that always respond in an aggressive way to the first line without reading the rest of the post, thus making no sense).
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
