While I can understand why some here might think that a high impact journal may not be as interested in publishing the results of this trial if the original endpoints (which are now secondary endpoints) were not met, would the fact that this quadruple-blinded and randomized trial for a rare disease is now comparing its treatment arm to external controls for their primary and secondary endpoints make the content intriguing enough for these same journals? Especially in light of the fact that only one year ago, the FDA published a guidance indicating their willingness to accept these types of endpoint measures?
Now, of course, and to be quadruple clear, I have absolutely no idea what the top line data will show, although I, along with plenty of others, think the primary endpoint will pretty much be a slam dunk. My point here is to simply suggest that these journals may find the unique state of the DCVax-L revised endpoints to be, at the very least, extremely topical content.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
