hyperopia,
What is interesting in the observations about PDL-1 expression on DCs in this article is that Dr. Prins years ago stated that they thought that the interference from checkpoint response was coming mainly from DCs and it turned out to be primarily from macrophages. This tells me that there is a difference between DCVax-L and Direct activation that can be identified by another activated state comparison, ie this study, which is in line with the Direct patent that points to an optimized maturation state and optimized amount of activation factor to produce DCs that produce a specific signaling pattern. Once that is done then just making sure that signaling remains constant by refreshing the signaling at the right interval will keep checkpoint interference from happening until the tumor has been completely destroyed.
The hit or miss kind of partial response in this study seems to be pointing to generic DCs and there is improper spacing of treatments based on how Direct will be administered in all future trials. There is no way, just based on casual observation, that this is Direct because I do not believe NWBO would allow it to be utilized this way when NWBO knows how it ought to be utilized for best effect. Best wishes.