InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

GoodGuyBill

09/11/19 7:47 PM

#243794 RE: exwannabe #243793

Pardon me Ex, I assumed that if the trial failed (because DCVAX-L did not meet is endpoints), than it didn't work. How foolish of me.


I can not speak for iclight, but I have never asserted DCVax-L does not work. I think it does work, but not as magically effective across the board as most here do.

I do believe the P3 trial failed, but that is not the same. Even if DCVax-L was working sufficiently well in the trial, psPD + x-over could destroy the results.

And this second paragraph is IMO, not an asserted fact.
© 2019 InvestorsHub.com, Inc.

icon url

hope4patients

09/11/19 7:53 PM

#243795 RE: exwannabe #243793

Stop the presses! Exwannabe thinks DCVAX-L "WORKS" and he/she decides to make this confession just before results are released. The kind of stuff that makes you go hmmm
icon url

iclight

09/12/19 1:01 PM

#243897 RE: exwannabe #243793

I don't think it works. If the company thought it worked they would have unblinded long ago. They can't even tell shareholders how they plan to get it approved, what the endpoints are and why normal companies take a weekend to develop an SAP and they are going on years. For as long as this SAP has taken, they could have written a different SAP for each patient in the trial.