InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Doktornolittle

05/29/16 10:18 PM

#63256 RE: Doktornolittle #63254

(Late Corrected Quote) Sorry Sentiment, I thought it was Pyrrhonian that said he thought the hold was by the sponsor, not you. I thought I was reading his post, not your's. It was unexpected that he would say that, but thought it was him.

He reposted the relevant section of the the 10K this morning in post # 63157.

Quote:
Our Phase III trial of DCVax-L is on a partial clinical hold for new screening for enrollment. We do not know what will happen with this partial hold. Although we have over 300 of the planned 348 patients already enrolled in this trial, and they have continued to be treated without interruption, we may not be released from the screening hold and may not be able to complete the planned enrollment in this trial.

icon url

Poor Man -

05/30/16 3:21 PM

#63303 RE: Doktornolittle #63254

And again, the 10K language seems to be clear that this hold was not called by the sponsor.


It seems if the sponsor initiated the hold, the company would have completed a large fund raise just prior to halt in order to capitalized on the high stock price in July and early August, knowing in advance what the impact of the halt would have on the stock price thereafter.

I believe the halt was a potentially positive development, long term. But it also appears to have taken Linda and Les by surprise. There could be some other type of technical regulatory issues that unexpectedly surfaced, requiring the sponsor to initiate the halt themselves; but as a practical matter, that's more or less the same thing as the FDA initiating the halt.