Replies to post #311002 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[flipper44]

Smh. How about instead they gave interim efficacy results by September 1, perhaps based on an August soft lock. That would make more sense if the hard lock has not occurred yet? Just guessing.

[meirluc]

I am not. I've suggested that Linda Liau's reputation is such that they were given the plenary presentation position. If data lock has not yet occurred, then that would strongly suggest that the event was granted based on her reputation, and not SNO rules requiring unblinded data.

Why would Linda Liau submit a request for a plenary presentation position when data lock was not yet in force and the trial was not yet unblinded and statistically analyzed?

Absent enough data, LL would not yet have possessed the results and would not have been able to determine the quality of her presentation or would not be certain as to what part of the data can be included in such a presentation.

While the plenary event could have been granted on the basis of her reputation, I cannot believe that a scientist with her integrity would submit a request for such an event without having reviewed and analyzed sufficient unblinded data that convinced her that the trial was successful and can be presented.

Was enough data submitted to LL after placement of a soft data lock? If after implementation of a soft data lock, LL received sufficient data to request a plenary presentation, how much data that is still blinded is now eligible for the hard data lock that has not yet been imposed? Is it perhaps only the IDH mutation information that was not yet transmitted to LL before she submitted her request to SNO?