That was a traditional manufacturing build out estimate. Personalized cellular manufacturing processes are anything but ordinary... one could argue theirs should cost more, particularly if they are trying to cover the surgical GBM market, to start.
Perhaps you are thinking that most of the costs they are paying to Cognate is to cover the patients in the trial(s). The issue becomes that we truly don't know how much of what they paid to Cognate is being used to teach NW Bio to fish, meaning build out NW Bio's own manufacturing in the UK. Who knows, eventually NW Bio will not need Cognate's manufacturing cababilities (I'm thinking far out into the future, if their Phase III is successful).
I do agree the fees do seem high, but I remind myself that this is new terrain. I have yet to see what it costs to have a company pull it off successful. Anyway, I'm trying to reserve judgment until the facts on the investigation comes in.
Before you pull the plug on the science (if you eventually agree they use NWBO activation/maturation patents), you really should consider that in the last five years scientist have gotten better and better at determining the exact epitopes to target for the GBM subtypes. Any sequential HLA lessons learned from Prins in the lab bench can immediately be transferred to the bedside, meaning Cognate can replicate those antigen targets from patient's lysate. That's a good thing. JMO
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
