News Focus
News Focus
icon url

VikingInvest

01/14/22 6:13 PM

#435259 RE: meirluc #435258

I understand that we are all just speculating. Unfortunately, there's only so many places for big presentations annually. This one is the only one around this time. I was mostly basing my speculation on the topic of his presentation, that could be a victory lap after successful TLD/Pub.

I am not going to speculate on when we will see TLD/Pub coming, as that matters very little to me. It will be here when it comes. With mostly every event, there will be indicators that can mean either soon, or that we are still some time away. That is up to each individual investor to assess.
icon url

hope4patients

01/14/22 6:14 PM

#435260 RE: meirluc #435258

Illness, emergency, etc were not the reasons according to DI. Sounds like we are VERY close!
icon url

CrashOverride

01/14/22 6:49 PM

#435263 RE: meirluc #435258

Why would Bosch break a quiet period to do a literature review of all the failed GBM treatments? Those are already well known. Linda Liau did this already at Mt Sinai.

No, I think this would have been a post-TLD talk to discuss DCVax-Direct.
icon url

skitahoe

01/14/22 6:55 PM

#435264 RE: meirluc #435258

Meirluc,

I believe that you're right on the money, but I also think we should look back at SNO 2020. We all know that back then Dr. Liau submitted a placeholder abstract, but when TLD wasn't available to her and the company in time to build the presentation, it was pulled before it ever became part of the formal program. We know this because posters found the abstracts listed, the company never announced it, so when it was pulled, they never announced that either as they had never announced the intent to present at SNO.

In this case, I believe their thinking may have been that Dr. Bosch could potentially have made the presentation without revealing TLD, but they had believed that it would be out by the time he presented. Frankly I think they're concerned that we're very close to the Journal, but if he presented he'd be subjected to intense questioning and be hard pressed not to reveal something that shouldn't be revealed until at least the TLD statement was issued, if not the Journal. I believe they knew that he could be yanked out of this conference last minute, but clearly this time he was formally announced to be part of the presentation there.

I believe we're getting very close, but it won't be happening next week. I do believe that the booth they're taking at ASCO will almost certainly have the trial well presented there and I wouldn't be surprised at all to hear that at the Experts Forum the company, and a number of the patients in they trial could be discussing their experience. With the Journal out well before ASCO, the only way a technical presentation can be made there will be if new information can be added to what's already covered in the Journal. If in fact the company, or the clinicians, have continued to track all the patients who're still surviving in the trial, perhaps that information would be worthy of a presentation. I'm uncertain if the Journal will be based on the information at data lock, or has over a year's additional data. By ASCO we'll be nearly two years from data lock, if in fact the Journal is based on the data at data lock, if they have up to date data an Abstract with that much new information ought to be considered. I don't believe that patients share their experience during the technical presentations, so an appearance in the Experts Forum could be made even if they make a technical presentation there, I believe they did that at ASCO some time ago.

Monday's a market holiday, not that we'll necessarily drop the positive TLD on a Monday, but historically it's the best day to issue positive information, as brokers can work with clients all week while considering it new information. If they announce TLD and the Clinical Trials update on Monday, they could announce the Journal publishing later in the week, I don't believe shorts would have much opportunity to build anything on the detail lacking from the TLD statement which would be covered just a matter of days later.

Gary
icon url

dennisdave

01/15/22 5:33 AM

#435336 RE: meirluc #435258

Your explanation makes sense. If the presentation was always intended prior to TLD / journal as we have seen Dr Liau's last year then they would have not canceled. Something very short notice came up so they had to cancel and if I had to guess it is NEJM letting NWBO know they had to move the publication to another time frame.