Replies to post #162212 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[pgsd]

Dr Bosch suggested to his peers they would find the journal "interesting" Perhaps over 60 trial doctors wanting to put their name to it would seem to agree and also, Linda was quoted at the ASM as being keen for the journal to be published asap as well. If this journal was anything but positive I cannot see these being the case IMO:-)

[flipper44]

Senti, here is the entire Meifud posting on Yahoo. It is stated as fact, but I consider it gossip, rumor and innuendo. The parts I highlighted are tips to me me it might have been AF's doings.

publication will be in the Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology (which is in Germany), and will share how the trial was designed, how patients were screened, how pseudoprogression diagnosis has been complicated by reaction to the vaccine, why the trial was redesigned and expanded, etc., and a lot of numbers from a year ago will appear again but with the caveat that comparison with the average survival of GBM patients has to factor in the screening criteria applied to phase III enrollees that was not applied to the general population of GBM patientswith the control group effectively gone via compassionate crossover the plan now is to compare the survival rate of patients in the phase III with the general population of GBM patients. however doing so presents a problem in that the phase III patients had to meet criteria including proof there was no progression following resection. this was not true of the general population of GBM patients. so comparison between the two would be distorted and would show pseudo success for the phase III patients. (He's overselling bear case through false equivalence)
what this means is that the encouraging numbers advertised at ASCO last year are more likely attributable to careful screening to specific criteria to ensure only the 'best' patients were enrolled in the phase III -- which means the fact some patients are still alive does not necessarily mean the vaccine is working (He's overselling bear case through exaggeration)
sorry to burst your bubble but you are too closed-minded to let that happen anyhow -- Meifud

The fact that he oversells the challenges of matching historical to the Phase three trial is a clue. Also, historically, most trials in this area remove early progressors. Also, the Journal is in Germany, and we know how AF likes to tease about Germany. Nonetheless, I'm not saying the Journal is incorrect, I'm saying we don't know if it's correct.

If the Journal is correct, which is not known, I guess we should also add to the watchlist that German conference Dr. Bosch once presented at, coming up March 19-21. http://itoc-conference.eu Does not look like abstracts were released. Doubt this will be the venue for anything this year.

[Lykiri]

Don’t worry about "Meifud" and its figures. He's not as good at mathematics.This is what he wrote 6 days ago on Yahoo message:

Quote Meifud:
Meifud 6 days ago

“after full enrollment in 2015, even Linda Liau was described as having these concerns with the phase III...
-- "She sounded a cautionary note that the proscribed endpoints for the trial which are median progression free survival or mPFS (primary endpoint) and median overall survival or mOS (secondary endpoint) may not be the right endpoints for the trial...She worries that this could be an issue for the trial."
-- "She also notes that patients who were started on placebo and whose disease progressed were allowed to switch to DCVax-L. This confounds the overall survival analysis as 67% of patients initially received DCVax-L; 19% of control patients received DCVax-L at a later time after their disease progressed; and 14% did not receive DCVax-L. This could confound the analysis of overall survival."


“19% of control patients received DCVax-L at a later time after their disease progressed”???

WE ALL KNOW BETTER!